a chronology of natural disastersspatial.cisr.ucsc.edu/envs/thesis/oehrlim1981.pdfmuch of the...
TRANSCRIPT
A CHRONOLOGY OF NATURAL DISASTERS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CALIFORNIA
A Chronology of Events Compiled from the Historic Record
A Senior Thesis
by
Michael D Oehrli
Submitted to the Department of Environmenta1~Studies
and Thesis Sponsor Gary B Griggs in Partial Fulfillment
~ of the Requirements for the Degree of
Bachelor of Arts
I i
University of California Santa Cruz
May 1981
1 shy G
1
1
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my Thesis Sponsor and Professor
of Earth Sciences at the University of California Santa Cruz
Gary B Griggs for his guidance and assistance in helping to
make this paper middotpossible
I would also like to thank John Williams Professor of
Geology at San Jose State University for sharing his knowledge
about the tsunami history of the San FranciscQ Bay region
Lastly I would like to thank Paul Stubbs and Carol
Champion of Special Collections at the University of California
Santa Cruz for -their assistance and permission to copy photoshy
graphs from the local disaster collection
CONTENTS
I Introduction 1
II Abstract 2
III Earthquakes 4
IV Tsqrtamis bull bull bull bull 34
v Floods 40
VI Major Storms bullbullbullbull 79
VII Snowstorms 86
VIII Droughts 91
IX Conclusion bull bull bull bull bullbull 94
X References 96
INTRODUCTION
Choosing a thesis topic is not an easy task especially
when so many topics of interest have already been researched
However despite the many setbacks encouragements and discoushy
ragements that I encountered in this pursuit my initial inte~est
in hist~ric earthquakes led me to the local history collection
at the UCSC Library There I found bits and pieces of inforshy
mation on local earthquakes as well as other aisastersisH was
also interested in a collection of unassembled disastersphotos
kept in Special Colle ctions bull
After my initial search was completed I discovered that
much of the information anrJlocal disasters was scattered bits
and pieces oCmiddotdata with ofewoomplete-cRlIonolegies of events
Thus in combination with the unassembled disaster photos I
decided to put together a complete and concise omronology of
natural disasters using as much information as I could find
on local events I then arrived at a title for this paper
A CHRONOLOGY OF NATURAL DISASTERS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CALI~~
FORNIA
1
ABSTRACT
This report is divided into six sections one for each
type of natural disaster most likely to affect Santa Cruz County
They appear in the following order Earthquakesf Tsunamis
Floods Major Storms Snowstorms and Droughts
Earthquakes are the most common natural event likely to
affect Santa Cruz County Most of the population is located
on loosely compacted alluvial soils thus ground shaking and the
potential for liquefaction is high in these areas In the
higher elevations of the county and closer to most of the fault
traces landsliding and surface rupture is a real threat
Tsunamis are observed here very infrequently and their
approach is often preceeded by ample warning However a tsushy
nami generated by a local quake is likely to cause more damage
and pose a greater threat to human life than one generated
by a distant earthquake The waves originating from an earthshy~
quake in the Monterey Bay would probably be higher and not
preceeded by ample public warnings
Floods have damaged the downtown sections of Santa Cruz
Soquel Capitola and Watsonville many times in the past and
are responsible for causing the largest amount of property
damage The rainfall causing these events often reaches an
intensity here comparable to any of the highest intensities
seen in the United States
Major storms are common in the winter months and if they
dont result in flooding they often do cause heavy wave damage
2
to beachfront properties Strong onshore surges high waves
high tides and small winter beaches combine to produce seashore
property damage almost annually
Snowstonns are rare but they do occurorl occasiontdn the
higher elevations of the county The heavy burden of snow
when placed upon the relativelyunsupportive limbs of redwood
trees causes them to topple Personal property and communi
cation lines are particularly suceptible in light of the rapidly
increasing population of the Santa Cruz Mountains
And finally drought can place a severe economic burden
on the county which is heavily dependent upon agriculture Also
limited water supplies cannot sustain an ever increasing popushy
lation if an extended drought occurs bull
1 jtr 1 1bull
3
EARTHQUAKES
Santa Cruz County is located in one of the most seisshy
mically active regions of the world Numerous faults cut
through the county-namely the San Andreas which can produce
earthquakes exceeding a Richter magnitude of 80 Other lesser
known faults such as the San Gregorio are capable of generating
destructive magnitude 72 - 79 earthquakes The Butano Ben
Lomond Zayante Corralitos and Sargent faults are also capshy
able of destructive earthquakes though Qf lesser magnitudes
The potential for surface rupture is high in these fault
zones and care must be exercised when allowing construction
there Landsliding is also common and often induced by a
seismic disturbance in these areas Extensive alluvial deposhy
sits and high ground water tables in downtown Santa Cruz Watshy
sonville Capitola and Soquel serve to intensify ground
shaking and increase the likelihood of liquefaction These ~
areas are the most damage prone locations of the county and
are often the most heavily urbanized
The seismic record of Santa Cruz County although relashy
tively short has shown time and time again that most damage
occurs in urbanized lowlands built on loosely compacted allushy
vial soils with high ground water tables As urbanization of
these areas continues the potential for serious damage increases
Lesser magnitude quakes can now cause as much damage as some
of the larger quakes of the past merely due to higher popula~
tion densities and occasionally poor construction practices
4
The chronology that follows shows that indeed the damage
potential is increasing Only damage producing earthquakes
are listed Many more quakes have been felt but are not listed
as the resulting chronology would be far too extensive to be
included in this report
October 11-3111800
Major earthquakes w~re recorded at Mission San Juan Baushy
tista on the 11th and the 18th The most severe shock was on
the 18th and others occurred at a maximum rate of six per day
from the 11th to the 31st There was a considerable amount of
damage at the mission and all the buildings were declared damshy
aged and uninhabitable A deep fissure opened along the Pajaro
River and the October 11th shock was accompanied by a deafening
noise In Santa Cruz the historical record of Villa Branci~
forte makes no mention of this earthquake
1813 or 1815
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity IX or X occurred in
the Santa Clara Valley John Gilroy stated that all buildingsq
in the region shook down Had Santa Cruz been more heavily ~NJtP
at the time andearthquake of that intensity would have almost
certainly caused some damage heremiddot
A historical account of Mission Santa Cruz written by
Paul Johnson states that bullmiddot a series of earthquakes bull caused So
much damage that it took years of labor to repair the buildings
6
June 9-10 1836
An earthquake estimated to have a Mercalli Intensity of
IX or X occurred along the Hayward fault It created fissures
in the earth and shocks continued for a month IThequake
apparentlycaused great havoc in Monterey and Santa Clara
The intensity was VII in Monterey f A quake of this intensity
would probably have caused damage in Santa Cruz had it been
more heavily populated at the time
June 1838
A major earthquake of Mercalli Intensity X severely dam
aged the San Francisco San Jose and Santa Clara Missions
Buildings cracked and crockery and glassware broke at Monterey
(January 16-18 1840) Four sources state that an earthquake destroyed the Santa
Cruz Mission and a tidal wave carried many tiles to the sea
This story however has been discounted by the Santa Cruz
Historical S-ociety which stated in October of 1973
rr eOneof the bells cracked on its initial sound and one broke When the towercollapsed in 1840 No rain or earthquake happened on that date No excuse except poor material or workmanship
There is also no record of this quake in the History of Villa
Branciforte although it is thought that a severe storm did
occur
July) 1841
Within a period of two months 120 shocks were felt in
the Monterey area and some were felt at sea On July 3rd j
there was a possible severe shock in Monterey Ba~ This may
also be the same event which reportedly caused damage to
Mission Santa Cruz in 1845
7
January 9 and 20 l85
A major earthquake struck the Fert Tejon area of Southern
California on January 9th It was felt from the Northern
Sacramento Valley south to San Diego Two of the shocks were
felt in Santa Cruz and one is deemed responsible for the
collapse of the front wall of the mission which was already
weakened by its construction on water-logged soil Another
quake--(maybe local in origin) on January 20th had a Rossishy
Forell Intensity of middotV ~andfurther weakened the structure
Thirty-eight days later the southwest corner of the building
fell without the aid of any further earthquakes
October 8 1865
The most sever~ shock since the annexation of the terrishy
tory occurred on this date in 1865 The quake was probably
centered on[~the San Andreas poundaul t in the Santa Cruz Mountains
and is known as one of the five largest quakes to strike the
San Francisco Bay region in historic t~mes The Richter Magshy
nitude was estimated at 70-73~~and dam~ge in the City of San
Francisco amounted to $500000
The first dispatch from Santa Cruz stated that every
brick building here is ruined Total losses in the City of
Santa Cruz were estimated at $10000 In Watsonville $2000
in damage was done $1500 of which occurred at the Pajaro
Flouring Mills It was stated that every merchant in town lost
between $10 and $150 in crockery and glassware Well construcshy
ted buildings or those built on solid ground suffered little
or no damage Cracks appeared on the banks of the Pajaro River
ranging from 10-15 inches wide and hundreds of yards long
8
Highest intensities were felt in the Santa Cruz Mountains
between Santa Cruz and San Jose bull Chimneys fell along Santa
Cruz Gap Road and landsliding boulders blocked the highway
There were broken water mains and gas pipes along with a deep
crevice in one street At Mountain Charley~s along the same
road steam and water were thrown up through cracks and dust
clouds were ejected from drier soils
Wells and streams in Santa Cruz County were markedly
affected as many of their volumes doubled Water also boiled
up from the ground for half an hour after the shock This
was observed at the old Mission orchard
In Monterey Bay the quake was also felt as a fisherman
of Captain Davenports Whaling Company saidthat the wave motion
was rough a~d cross-cutting Immediately after the sea was
calm as a mill pond bullwhile the bay was full of little bubbles
rising to the surface Near Soquel the sea was reported to
be rising and ~alling with convulsive throbs carrying some of
the high cliffs into the sea
Personalaccounts describe the shock as one of great
force but doing little major damage Large objects were moved
about l8inches in some cases Many coal-oil lamps were not
btokerit)~but set spinning from the jolting motion as they were
knocked off of mantles The ground settled along the San Loshy
renzo River cracking the soil along its banks several inches
wide Somelsmall cracks emitted jets of water two to four feet
high for several minutes
October 21 1868
On this date a great earthquake claimed 30 lives ~d
9
caused $350000 worth of property damage in the City of San
Francisco In Santa Cruz thequake had a Rossi-Forel 1_ Intenshy
sity of VIII and brick buildings were cracked but none toppled
The quake was believed to have been centered on the Hayward
fault with an estimated Richter Magnitude between 70 and 73
In Santa Cruz the chimneysmiddot that toppled were often the
ones that fe~~l before in 1865 ~ The Court House experienced
some cracking of plaster and a 50-foot wide debris landslide
at Eagle Glen carried rocks and trees 1000 feet In Soquel
a few chimney~ were dislocated and plastering suffered in
Watsonville
March 30 HB83
Nine shocks were felt in Watsonville and three in Santa
Cruz Slight damage was reported in Watsonville and Santa Cruz
Some clocks stopped in Watsonville
March 30 1885
A strong earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VI in Monterey
op~ned cracks along the Pajaro River
April 24 ~ 1890
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VII to IX shook the
Monterey Bay region on this date Damage was very light in
Santa Cruz but many chimney~ _- were thrown down in Watsonville
Ground fissures opened in the San Andreas fault ~one near
Chittenden and the railroad bridge over the Pajaro River there
was displaced 18 inches Landslides closed the railroad and
highway at Chittenden Pass~ Walls cracked plaster fell and
some windows broke but damage was not as great as in 1868
At Glenwood the ground cracked in several places and at Boulder
lO
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
I would like to thank my Thesis Sponsor and Professor
of Earth Sciences at the University of California Santa Cruz
Gary B Griggs for his guidance and assistance in helping to
make this paper middotpossible
I would also like to thank John Williams Professor of
Geology at San Jose State University for sharing his knowledge
about the tsunami history of the San FranciscQ Bay region
Lastly I would like to thank Paul Stubbs and Carol
Champion of Special Collections at the University of California
Santa Cruz for -their assistance and permission to copy photoshy
graphs from the local disaster collection
CONTENTS
I Introduction 1
II Abstract 2
III Earthquakes 4
IV Tsqrtamis bull bull bull bull 34
v Floods 40
VI Major Storms bullbullbullbull 79
VII Snowstorms 86
VIII Droughts 91
IX Conclusion bull bull bull bull bullbull 94
X References 96
INTRODUCTION
Choosing a thesis topic is not an easy task especially
when so many topics of interest have already been researched
However despite the many setbacks encouragements and discoushy
ragements that I encountered in this pursuit my initial inte~est
in hist~ric earthquakes led me to the local history collection
at the UCSC Library There I found bits and pieces of inforshy
mation on local earthquakes as well as other aisastersisH was
also interested in a collection of unassembled disastersphotos
kept in Special Colle ctions bull
After my initial search was completed I discovered that
much of the information anrJlocal disasters was scattered bits
and pieces oCmiddotdata with ofewoomplete-cRlIonolegies of events
Thus in combination with the unassembled disaster photos I
decided to put together a complete and concise omronology of
natural disasters using as much information as I could find
on local events I then arrived at a title for this paper
A CHRONOLOGY OF NATURAL DISASTERS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CALI~~
FORNIA
1
ABSTRACT
This report is divided into six sections one for each
type of natural disaster most likely to affect Santa Cruz County
They appear in the following order Earthquakesf Tsunamis
Floods Major Storms Snowstorms and Droughts
Earthquakes are the most common natural event likely to
affect Santa Cruz County Most of the population is located
on loosely compacted alluvial soils thus ground shaking and the
potential for liquefaction is high in these areas In the
higher elevations of the county and closer to most of the fault
traces landsliding and surface rupture is a real threat
Tsunamis are observed here very infrequently and their
approach is often preceeded by ample warning However a tsushy
nami generated by a local quake is likely to cause more damage
and pose a greater threat to human life than one generated
by a distant earthquake The waves originating from an earthshy~
quake in the Monterey Bay would probably be higher and not
preceeded by ample public warnings
Floods have damaged the downtown sections of Santa Cruz
Soquel Capitola and Watsonville many times in the past and
are responsible for causing the largest amount of property
damage The rainfall causing these events often reaches an
intensity here comparable to any of the highest intensities
seen in the United States
Major storms are common in the winter months and if they
dont result in flooding they often do cause heavy wave damage
2
to beachfront properties Strong onshore surges high waves
high tides and small winter beaches combine to produce seashore
property damage almost annually
Snowstonns are rare but they do occurorl occasiontdn the
higher elevations of the county The heavy burden of snow
when placed upon the relativelyunsupportive limbs of redwood
trees causes them to topple Personal property and communi
cation lines are particularly suceptible in light of the rapidly
increasing population of the Santa Cruz Mountains
And finally drought can place a severe economic burden
on the county which is heavily dependent upon agriculture Also
limited water supplies cannot sustain an ever increasing popushy
lation if an extended drought occurs bull
1 jtr 1 1bull
3
EARTHQUAKES
Santa Cruz County is located in one of the most seisshy
mically active regions of the world Numerous faults cut
through the county-namely the San Andreas which can produce
earthquakes exceeding a Richter magnitude of 80 Other lesser
known faults such as the San Gregorio are capable of generating
destructive magnitude 72 - 79 earthquakes The Butano Ben
Lomond Zayante Corralitos and Sargent faults are also capshy
able of destructive earthquakes though Qf lesser magnitudes
The potential for surface rupture is high in these fault
zones and care must be exercised when allowing construction
there Landsliding is also common and often induced by a
seismic disturbance in these areas Extensive alluvial deposhy
sits and high ground water tables in downtown Santa Cruz Watshy
sonville Capitola and Soquel serve to intensify ground
shaking and increase the likelihood of liquefaction These ~
areas are the most damage prone locations of the county and
are often the most heavily urbanized
The seismic record of Santa Cruz County although relashy
tively short has shown time and time again that most damage
occurs in urbanized lowlands built on loosely compacted allushy
vial soils with high ground water tables As urbanization of
these areas continues the potential for serious damage increases
Lesser magnitude quakes can now cause as much damage as some
of the larger quakes of the past merely due to higher popula~
tion densities and occasionally poor construction practices
4
The chronology that follows shows that indeed the damage
potential is increasing Only damage producing earthquakes
are listed Many more quakes have been felt but are not listed
as the resulting chronology would be far too extensive to be
included in this report
October 11-3111800
Major earthquakes w~re recorded at Mission San Juan Baushy
tista on the 11th and the 18th The most severe shock was on
the 18th and others occurred at a maximum rate of six per day
from the 11th to the 31st There was a considerable amount of
damage at the mission and all the buildings were declared damshy
aged and uninhabitable A deep fissure opened along the Pajaro
River and the October 11th shock was accompanied by a deafening
noise In Santa Cruz the historical record of Villa Branci~
forte makes no mention of this earthquake
1813 or 1815
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity IX or X occurred in
the Santa Clara Valley John Gilroy stated that all buildingsq
in the region shook down Had Santa Cruz been more heavily ~NJtP
at the time andearthquake of that intensity would have almost
certainly caused some damage heremiddot
A historical account of Mission Santa Cruz written by
Paul Johnson states that bullmiddot a series of earthquakes bull caused So
much damage that it took years of labor to repair the buildings
6
June 9-10 1836
An earthquake estimated to have a Mercalli Intensity of
IX or X occurred along the Hayward fault It created fissures
in the earth and shocks continued for a month IThequake
apparentlycaused great havoc in Monterey and Santa Clara
The intensity was VII in Monterey f A quake of this intensity
would probably have caused damage in Santa Cruz had it been
more heavily populated at the time
June 1838
A major earthquake of Mercalli Intensity X severely dam
aged the San Francisco San Jose and Santa Clara Missions
Buildings cracked and crockery and glassware broke at Monterey
(January 16-18 1840) Four sources state that an earthquake destroyed the Santa
Cruz Mission and a tidal wave carried many tiles to the sea
This story however has been discounted by the Santa Cruz
Historical S-ociety which stated in October of 1973
rr eOneof the bells cracked on its initial sound and one broke When the towercollapsed in 1840 No rain or earthquake happened on that date No excuse except poor material or workmanship
There is also no record of this quake in the History of Villa
Branciforte although it is thought that a severe storm did
occur
July) 1841
Within a period of two months 120 shocks were felt in
the Monterey area and some were felt at sea On July 3rd j
there was a possible severe shock in Monterey Ba~ This may
also be the same event which reportedly caused damage to
Mission Santa Cruz in 1845
7
January 9 and 20 l85
A major earthquake struck the Fert Tejon area of Southern
California on January 9th It was felt from the Northern
Sacramento Valley south to San Diego Two of the shocks were
felt in Santa Cruz and one is deemed responsible for the
collapse of the front wall of the mission which was already
weakened by its construction on water-logged soil Another
quake--(maybe local in origin) on January 20th had a Rossishy
Forell Intensity of middotV ~andfurther weakened the structure
Thirty-eight days later the southwest corner of the building
fell without the aid of any further earthquakes
October 8 1865
The most sever~ shock since the annexation of the terrishy
tory occurred on this date in 1865 The quake was probably
centered on[~the San Andreas poundaul t in the Santa Cruz Mountains
and is known as one of the five largest quakes to strike the
San Francisco Bay region in historic t~mes The Richter Magshy
nitude was estimated at 70-73~~and dam~ge in the City of San
Francisco amounted to $500000
The first dispatch from Santa Cruz stated that every
brick building here is ruined Total losses in the City of
Santa Cruz were estimated at $10000 In Watsonville $2000
in damage was done $1500 of which occurred at the Pajaro
Flouring Mills It was stated that every merchant in town lost
between $10 and $150 in crockery and glassware Well construcshy
ted buildings or those built on solid ground suffered little
or no damage Cracks appeared on the banks of the Pajaro River
ranging from 10-15 inches wide and hundreds of yards long
8
Highest intensities were felt in the Santa Cruz Mountains
between Santa Cruz and San Jose bull Chimneys fell along Santa
Cruz Gap Road and landsliding boulders blocked the highway
There were broken water mains and gas pipes along with a deep
crevice in one street At Mountain Charley~s along the same
road steam and water were thrown up through cracks and dust
clouds were ejected from drier soils
Wells and streams in Santa Cruz County were markedly
affected as many of their volumes doubled Water also boiled
up from the ground for half an hour after the shock This
was observed at the old Mission orchard
In Monterey Bay the quake was also felt as a fisherman
of Captain Davenports Whaling Company saidthat the wave motion
was rough a~d cross-cutting Immediately after the sea was
calm as a mill pond bullwhile the bay was full of little bubbles
rising to the surface Near Soquel the sea was reported to
be rising and ~alling with convulsive throbs carrying some of
the high cliffs into the sea
Personalaccounts describe the shock as one of great
force but doing little major damage Large objects were moved
about l8inches in some cases Many coal-oil lamps were not
btokerit)~but set spinning from the jolting motion as they were
knocked off of mantles The ground settled along the San Loshy
renzo River cracking the soil along its banks several inches
wide Somelsmall cracks emitted jets of water two to four feet
high for several minutes
October 21 1868
On this date a great earthquake claimed 30 lives ~d
9
caused $350000 worth of property damage in the City of San
Francisco In Santa Cruz thequake had a Rossi-Forel 1_ Intenshy
sity of VIII and brick buildings were cracked but none toppled
The quake was believed to have been centered on the Hayward
fault with an estimated Richter Magnitude between 70 and 73
In Santa Cruz the chimneysmiddot that toppled were often the
ones that fe~~l before in 1865 ~ The Court House experienced
some cracking of plaster and a 50-foot wide debris landslide
at Eagle Glen carried rocks and trees 1000 feet In Soquel
a few chimney~ were dislocated and plastering suffered in
Watsonville
March 30 HB83
Nine shocks were felt in Watsonville and three in Santa
Cruz Slight damage was reported in Watsonville and Santa Cruz
Some clocks stopped in Watsonville
March 30 1885
A strong earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VI in Monterey
op~ned cracks along the Pajaro River
April 24 ~ 1890
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VII to IX shook the
Monterey Bay region on this date Damage was very light in
Santa Cruz but many chimney~ _- were thrown down in Watsonville
Ground fissures opened in the San Andreas fault ~one near
Chittenden and the railroad bridge over the Pajaro River there
was displaced 18 inches Landslides closed the railroad and
highway at Chittenden Pass~ Walls cracked plaster fell and
some windows broke but damage was not as great as in 1868
At Glenwood the ground cracked in several places and at Boulder
lO
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
CONTENTS
I Introduction 1
II Abstract 2
III Earthquakes 4
IV Tsqrtamis bull bull bull bull 34
v Floods 40
VI Major Storms bullbullbullbull 79
VII Snowstorms 86
VIII Droughts 91
IX Conclusion bull bull bull bull bullbull 94
X References 96
INTRODUCTION
Choosing a thesis topic is not an easy task especially
when so many topics of interest have already been researched
However despite the many setbacks encouragements and discoushy
ragements that I encountered in this pursuit my initial inte~est
in hist~ric earthquakes led me to the local history collection
at the UCSC Library There I found bits and pieces of inforshy
mation on local earthquakes as well as other aisastersisH was
also interested in a collection of unassembled disastersphotos
kept in Special Colle ctions bull
After my initial search was completed I discovered that
much of the information anrJlocal disasters was scattered bits
and pieces oCmiddotdata with ofewoomplete-cRlIonolegies of events
Thus in combination with the unassembled disaster photos I
decided to put together a complete and concise omronology of
natural disasters using as much information as I could find
on local events I then arrived at a title for this paper
A CHRONOLOGY OF NATURAL DISASTERS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CALI~~
FORNIA
1
ABSTRACT
This report is divided into six sections one for each
type of natural disaster most likely to affect Santa Cruz County
They appear in the following order Earthquakesf Tsunamis
Floods Major Storms Snowstorms and Droughts
Earthquakes are the most common natural event likely to
affect Santa Cruz County Most of the population is located
on loosely compacted alluvial soils thus ground shaking and the
potential for liquefaction is high in these areas In the
higher elevations of the county and closer to most of the fault
traces landsliding and surface rupture is a real threat
Tsunamis are observed here very infrequently and their
approach is often preceeded by ample warning However a tsushy
nami generated by a local quake is likely to cause more damage
and pose a greater threat to human life than one generated
by a distant earthquake The waves originating from an earthshy~
quake in the Monterey Bay would probably be higher and not
preceeded by ample public warnings
Floods have damaged the downtown sections of Santa Cruz
Soquel Capitola and Watsonville many times in the past and
are responsible for causing the largest amount of property
damage The rainfall causing these events often reaches an
intensity here comparable to any of the highest intensities
seen in the United States
Major storms are common in the winter months and if they
dont result in flooding they often do cause heavy wave damage
2
to beachfront properties Strong onshore surges high waves
high tides and small winter beaches combine to produce seashore
property damage almost annually
Snowstonns are rare but they do occurorl occasiontdn the
higher elevations of the county The heavy burden of snow
when placed upon the relativelyunsupportive limbs of redwood
trees causes them to topple Personal property and communi
cation lines are particularly suceptible in light of the rapidly
increasing population of the Santa Cruz Mountains
And finally drought can place a severe economic burden
on the county which is heavily dependent upon agriculture Also
limited water supplies cannot sustain an ever increasing popushy
lation if an extended drought occurs bull
1 jtr 1 1bull
3
EARTHQUAKES
Santa Cruz County is located in one of the most seisshy
mically active regions of the world Numerous faults cut
through the county-namely the San Andreas which can produce
earthquakes exceeding a Richter magnitude of 80 Other lesser
known faults such as the San Gregorio are capable of generating
destructive magnitude 72 - 79 earthquakes The Butano Ben
Lomond Zayante Corralitos and Sargent faults are also capshy
able of destructive earthquakes though Qf lesser magnitudes
The potential for surface rupture is high in these fault
zones and care must be exercised when allowing construction
there Landsliding is also common and often induced by a
seismic disturbance in these areas Extensive alluvial deposhy
sits and high ground water tables in downtown Santa Cruz Watshy
sonville Capitola and Soquel serve to intensify ground
shaking and increase the likelihood of liquefaction These ~
areas are the most damage prone locations of the county and
are often the most heavily urbanized
The seismic record of Santa Cruz County although relashy
tively short has shown time and time again that most damage
occurs in urbanized lowlands built on loosely compacted allushy
vial soils with high ground water tables As urbanization of
these areas continues the potential for serious damage increases
Lesser magnitude quakes can now cause as much damage as some
of the larger quakes of the past merely due to higher popula~
tion densities and occasionally poor construction practices
4
The chronology that follows shows that indeed the damage
potential is increasing Only damage producing earthquakes
are listed Many more quakes have been felt but are not listed
as the resulting chronology would be far too extensive to be
included in this report
October 11-3111800
Major earthquakes w~re recorded at Mission San Juan Baushy
tista on the 11th and the 18th The most severe shock was on
the 18th and others occurred at a maximum rate of six per day
from the 11th to the 31st There was a considerable amount of
damage at the mission and all the buildings were declared damshy
aged and uninhabitable A deep fissure opened along the Pajaro
River and the October 11th shock was accompanied by a deafening
noise In Santa Cruz the historical record of Villa Branci~
forte makes no mention of this earthquake
1813 or 1815
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity IX or X occurred in
the Santa Clara Valley John Gilroy stated that all buildingsq
in the region shook down Had Santa Cruz been more heavily ~NJtP
at the time andearthquake of that intensity would have almost
certainly caused some damage heremiddot
A historical account of Mission Santa Cruz written by
Paul Johnson states that bullmiddot a series of earthquakes bull caused So
much damage that it took years of labor to repair the buildings
6
June 9-10 1836
An earthquake estimated to have a Mercalli Intensity of
IX or X occurred along the Hayward fault It created fissures
in the earth and shocks continued for a month IThequake
apparentlycaused great havoc in Monterey and Santa Clara
The intensity was VII in Monterey f A quake of this intensity
would probably have caused damage in Santa Cruz had it been
more heavily populated at the time
June 1838
A major earthquake of Mercalli Intensity X severely dam
aged the San Francisco San Jose and Santa Clara Missions
Buildings cracked and crockery and glassware broke at Monterey
(January 16-18 1840) Four sources state that an earthquake destroyed the Santa
Cruz Mission and a tidal wave carried many tiles to the sea
This story however has been discounted by the Santa Cruz
Historical S-ociety which stated in October of 1973
rr eOneof the bells cracked on its initial sound and one broke When the towercollapsed in 1840 No rain or earthquake happened on that date No excuse except poor material or workmanship
There is also no record of this quake in the History of Villa
Branciforte although it is thought that a severe storm did
occur
July) 1841
Within a period of two months 120 shocks were felt in
the Monterey area and some were felt at sea On July 3rd j
there was a possible severe shock in Monterey Ba~ This may
also be the same event which reportedly caused damage to
Mission Santa Cruz in 1845
7
January 9 and 20 l85
A major earthquake struck the Fert Tejon area of Southern
California on January 9th It was felt from the Northern
Sacramento Valley south to San Diego Two of the shocks were
felt in Santa Cruz and one is deemed responsible for the
collapse of the front wall of the mission which was already
weakened by its construction on water-logged soil Another
quake--(maybe local in origin) on January 20th had a Rossishy
Forell Intensity of middotV ~andfurther weakened the structure
Thirty-eight days later the southwest corner of the building
fell without the aid of any further earthquakes
October 8 1865
The most sever~ shock since the annexation of the terrishy
tory occurred on this date in 1865 The quake was probably
centered on[~the San Andreas poundaul t in the Santa Cruz Mountains
and is known as one of the five largest quakes to strike the
San Francisco Bay region in historic t~mes The Richter Magshy
nitude was estimated at 70-73~~and dam~ge in the City of San
Francisco amounted to $500000
The first dispatch from Santa Cruz stated that every
brick building here is ruined Total losses in the City of
Santa Cruz were estimated at $10000 In Watsonville $2000
in damage was done $1500 of which occurred at the Pajaro
Flouring Mills It was stated that every merchant in town lost
between $10 and $150 in crockery and glassware Well construcshy
ted buildings or those built on solid ground suffered little
or no damage Cracks appeared on the banks of the Pajaro River
ranging from 10-15 inches wide and hundreds of yards long
8
Highest intensities were felt in the Santa Cruz Mountains
between Santa Cruz and San Jose bull Chimneys fell along Santa
Cruz Gap Road and landsliding boulders blocked the highway
There were broken water mains and gas pipes along with a deep
crevice in one street At Mountain Charley~s along the same
road steam and water were thrown up through cracks and dust
clouds were ejected from drier soils
Wells and streams in Santa Cruz County were markedly
affected as many of their volumes doubled Water also boiled
up from the ground for half an hour after the shock This
was observed at the old Mission orchard
In Monterey Bay the quake was also felt as a fisherman
of Captain Davenports Whaling Company saidthat the wave motion
was rough a~d cross-cutting Immediately after the sea was
calm as a mill pond bullwhile the bay was full of little bubbles
rising to the surface Near Soquel the sea was reported to
be rising and ~alling with convulsive throbs carrying some of
the high cliffs into the sea
Personalaccounts describe the shock as one of great
force but doing little major damage Large objects were moved
about l8inches in some cases Many coal-oil lamps were not
btokerit)~but set spinning from the jolting motion as they were
knocked off of mantles The ground settled along the San Loshy
renzo River cracking the soil along its banks several inches
wide Somelsmall cracks emitted jets of water two to four feet
high for several minutes
October 21 1868
On this date a great earthquake claimed 30 lives ~d
9
caused $350000 worth of property damage in the City of San
Francisco In Santa Cruz thequake had a Rossi-Forel 1_ Intenshy
sity of VIII and brick buildings were cracked but none toppled
The quake was believed to have been centered on the Hayward
fault with an estimated Richter Magnitude between 70 and 73
In Santa Cruz the chimneysmiddot that toppled were often the
ones that fe~~l before in 1865 ~ The Court House experienced
some cracking of plaster and a 50-foot wide debris landslide
at Eagle Glen carried rocks and trees 1000 feet In Soquel
a few chimney~ were dislocated and plastering suffered in
Watsonville
March 30 HB83
Nine shocks were felt in Watsonville and three in Santa
Cruz Slight damage was reported in Watsonville and Santa Cruz
Some clocks stopped in Watsonville
March 30 1885
A strong earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VI in Monterey
op~ned cracks along the Pajaro River
April 24 ~ 1890
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VII to IX shook the
Monterey Bay region on this date Damage was very light in
Santa Cruz but many chimney~ _- were thrown down in Watsonville
Ground fissures opened in the San Andreas fault ~one near
Chittenden and the railroad bridge over the Pajaro River there
was displaced 18 inches Landslides closed the railroad and
highway at Chittenden Pass~ Walls cracked plaster fell and
some windows broke but damage was not as great as in 1868
At Glenwood the ground cracked in several places and at Boulder
lO
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
INTRODUCTION
Choosing a thesis topic is not an easy task especially
when so many topics of interest have already been researched
However despite the many setbacks encouragements and discoushy
ragements that I encountered in this pursuit my initial inte~est
in hist~ric earthquakes led me to the local history collection
at the UCSC Library There I found bits and pieces of inforshy
mation on local earthquakes as well as other aisastersisH was
also interested in a collection of unassembled disastersphotos
kept in Special Colle ctions bull
After my initial search was completed I discovered that
much of the information anrJlocal disasters was scattered bits
and pieces oCmiddotdata with ofewoomplete-cRlIonolegies of events
Thus in combination with the unassembled disaster photos I
decided to put together a complete and concise omronology of
natural disasters using as much information as I could find
on local events I then arrived at a title for this paper
A CHRONOLOGY OF NATURAL DISASTERS SANTA CRUZ COUNTY CALI~~
FORNIA
1
ABSTRACT
This report is divided into six sections one for each
type of natural disaster most likely to affect Santa Cruz County
They appear in the following order Earthquakesf Tsunamis
Floods Major Storms Snowstorms and Droughts
Earthquakes are the most common natural event likely to
affect Santa Cruz County Most of the population is located
on loosely compacted alluvial soils thus ground shaking and the
potential for liquefaction is high in these areas In the
higher elevations of the county and closer to most of the fault
traces landsliding and surface rupture is a real threat
Tsunamis are observed here very infrequently and their
approach is often preceeded by ample warning However a tsushy
nami generated by a local quake is likely to cause more damage
and pose a greater threat to human life than one generated
by a distant earthquake The waves originating from an earthshy~
quake in the Monterey Bay would probably be higher and not
preceeded by ample public warnings
Floods have damaged the downtown sections of Santa Cruz
Soquel Capitola and Watsonville many times in the past and
are responsible for causing the largest amount of property
damage The rainfall causing these events often reaches an
intensity here comparable to any of the highest intensities
seen in the United States
Major storms are common in the winter months and if they
dont result in flooding they often do cause heavy wave damage
2
to beachfront properties Strong onshore surges high waves
high tides and small winter beaches combine to produce seashore
property damage almost annually
Snowstonns are rare but they do occurorl occasiontdn the
higher elevations of the county The heavy burden of snow
when placed upon the relativelyunsupportive limbs of redwood
trees causes them to topple Personal property and communi
cation lines are particularly suceptible in light of the rapidly
increasing population of the Santa Cruz Mountains
And finally drought can place a severe economic burden
on the county which is heavily dependent upon agriculture Also
limited water supplies cannot sustain an ever increasing popushy
lation if an extended drought occurs bull
1 jtr 1 1bull
3
EARTHQUAKES
Santa Cruz County is located in one of the most seisshy
mically active regions of the world Numerous faults cut
through the county-namely the San Andreas which can produce
earthquakes exceeding a Richter magnitude of 80 Other lesser
known faults such as the San Gregorio are capable of generating
destructive magnitude 72 - 79 earthquakes The Butano Ben
Lomond Zayante Corralitos and Sargent faults are also capshy
able of destructive earthquakes though Qf lesser magnitudes
The potential for surface rupture is high in these fault
zones and care must be exercised when allowing construction
there Landsliding is also common and often induced by a
seismic disturbance in these areas Extensive alluvial deposhy
sits and high ground water tables in downtown Santa Cruz Watshy
sonville Capitola and Soquel serve to intensify ground
shaking and increase the likelihood of liquefaction These ~
areas are the most damage prone locations of the county and
are often the most heavily urbanized
The seismic record of Santa Cruz County although relashy
tively short has shown time and time again that most damage
occurs in urbanized lowlands built on loosely compacted allushy
vial soils with high ground water tables As urbanization of
these areas continues the potential for serious damage increases
Lesser magnitude quakes can now cause as much damage as some
of the larger quakes of the past merely due to higher popula~
tion densities and occasionally poor construction practices
4
The chronology that follows shows that indeed the damage
potential is increasing Only damage producing earthquakes
are listed Many more quakes have been felt but are not listed
as the resulting chronology would be far too extensive to be
included in this report
October 11-3111800
Major earthquakes w~re recorded at Mission San Juan Baushy
tista on the 11th and the 18th The most severe shock was on
the 18th and others occurred at a maximum rate of six per day
from the 11th to the 31st There was a considerable amount of
damage at the mission and all the buildings were declared damshy
aged and uninhabitable A deep fissure opened along the Pajaro
River and the October 11th shock was accompanied by a deafening
noise In Santa Cruz the historical record of Villa Branci~
forte makes no mention of this earthquake
1813 or 1815
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity IX or X occurred in
the Santa Clara Valley John Gilroy stated that all buildingsq
in the region shook down Had Santa Cruz been more heavily ~NJtP
at the time andearthquake of that intensity would have almost
certainly caused some damage heremiddot
A historical account of Mission Santa Cruz written by
Paul Johnson states that bullmiddot a series of earthquakes bull caused So
much damage that it took years of labor to repair the buildings
6
June 9-10 1836
An earthquake estimated to have a Mercalli Intensity of
IX or X occurred along the Hayward fault It created fissures
in the earth and shocks continued for a month IThequake
apparentlycaused great havoc in Monterey and Santa Clara
The intensity was VII in Monterey f A quake of this intensity
would probably have caused damage in Santa Cruz had it been
more heavily populated at the time
June 1838
A major earthquake of Mercalli Intensity X severely dam
aged the San Francisco San Jose and Santa Clara Missions
Buildings cracked and crockery and glassware broke at Monterey
(January 16-18 1840) Four sources state that an earthquake destroyed the Santa
Cruz Mission and a tidal wave carried many tiles to the sea
This story however has been discounted by the Santa Cruz
Historical S-ociety which stated in October of 1973
rr eOneof the bells cracked on its initial sound and one broke When the towercollapsed in 1840 No rain or earthquake happened on that date No excuse except poor material or workmanship
There is also no record of this quake in the History of Villa
Branciforte although it is thought that a severe storm did
occur
July) 1841
Within a period of two months 120 shocks were felt in
the Monterey area and some were felt at sea On July 3rd j
there was a possible severe shock in Monterey Ba~ This may
also be the same event which reportedly caused damage to
Mission Santa Cruz in 1845
7
January 9 and 20 l85
A major earthquake struck the Fert Tejon area of Southern
California on January 9th It was felt from the Northern
Sacramento Valley south to San Diego Two of the shocks were
felt in Santa Cruz and one is deemed responsible for the
collapse of the front wall of the mission which was already
weakened by its construction on water-logged soil Another
quake--(maybe local in origin) on January 20th had a Rossishy
Forell Intensity of middotV ~andfurther weakened the structure
Thirty-eight days later the southwest corner of the building
fell without the aid of any further earthquakes
October 8 1865
The most sever~ shock since the annexation of the terrishy
tory occurred on this date in 1865 The quake was probably
centered on[~the San Andreas poundaul t in the Santa Cruz Mountains
and is known as one of the five largest quakes to strike the
San Francisco Bay region in historic t~mes The Richter Magshy
nitude was estimated at 70-73~~and dam~ge in the City of San
Francisco amounted to $500000
The first dispatch from Santa Cruz stated that every
brick building here is ruined Total losses in the City of
Santa Cruz were estimated at $10000 In Watsonville $2000
in damage was done $1500 of which occurred at the Pajaro
Flouring Mills It was stated that every merchant in town lost
between $10 and $150 in crockery and glassware Well construcshy
ted buildings or those built on solid ground suffered little
or no damage Cracks appeared on the banks of the Pajaro River
ranging from 10-15 inches wide and hundreds of yards long
8
Highest intensities were felt in the Santa Cruz Mountains
between Santa Cruz and San Jose bull Chimneys fell along Santa
Cruz Gap Road and landsliding boulders blocked the highway
There were broken water mains and gas pipes along with a deep
crevice in one street At Mountain Charley~s along the same
road steam and water were thrown up through cracks and dust
clouds were ejected from drier soils
Wells and streams in Santa Cruz County were markedly
affected as many of their volumes doubled Water also boiled
up from the ground for half an hour after the shock This
was observed at the old Mission orchard
In Monterey Bay the quake was also felt as a fisherman
of Captain Davenports Whaling Company saidthat the wave motion
was rough a~d cross-cutting Immediately after the sea was
calm as a mill pond bullwhile the bay was full of little bubbles
rising to the surface Near Soquel the sea was reported to
be rising and ~alling with convulsive throbs carrying some of
the high cliffs into the sea
Personalaccounts describe the shock as one of great
force but doing little major damage Large objects were moved
about l8inches in some cases Many coal-oil lamps were not
btokerit)~but set spinning from the jolting motion as they were
knocked off of mantles The ground settled along the San Loshy
renzo River cracking the soil along its banks several inches
wide Somelsmall cracks emitted jets of water two to four feet
high for several minutes
October 21 1868
On this date a great earthquake claimed 30 lives ~d
9
caused $350000 worth of property damage in the City of San
Francisco In Santa Cruz thequake had a Rossi-Forel 1_ Intenshy
sity of VIII and brick buildings were cracked but none toppled
The quake was believed to have been centered on the Hayward
fault with an estimated Richter Magnitude between 70 and 73
In Santa Cruz the chimneysmiddot that toppled were often the
ones that fe~~l before in 1865 ~ The Court House experienced
some cracking of plaster and a 50-foot wide debris landslide
at Eagle Glen carried rocks and trees 1000 feet In Soquel
a few chimney~ were dislocated and plastering suffered in
Watsonville
March 30 HB83
Nine shocks were felt in Watsonville and three in Santa
Cruz Slight damage was reported in Watsonville and Santa Cruz
Some clocks stopped in Watsonville
March 30 1885
A strong earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VI in Monterey
op~ned cracks along the Pajaro River
April 24 ~ 1890
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VII to IX shook the
Monterey Bay region on this date Damage was very light in
Santa Cruz but many chimney~ _- were thrown down in Watsonville
Ground fissures opened in the San Andreas fault ~one near
Chittenden and the railroad bridge over the Pajaro River there
was displaced 18 inches Landslides closed the railroad and
highway at Chittenden Pass~ Walls cracked plaster fell and
some windows broke but damage was not as great as in 1868
At Glenwood the ground cracked in several places and at Boulder
lO
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
ABSTRACT
This report is divided into six sections one for each
type of natural disaster most likely to affect Santa Cruz County
They appear in the following order Earthquakesf Tsunamis
Floods Major Storms Snowstorms and Droughts
Earthquakes are the most common natural event likely to
affect Santa Cruz County Most of the population is located
on loosely compacted alluvial soils thus ground shaking and the
potential for liquefaction is high in these areas In the
higher elevations of the county and closer to most of the fault
traces landsliding and surface rupture is a real threat
Tsunamis are observed here very infrequently and their
approach is often preceeded by ample warning However a tsushy
nami generated by a local quake is likely to cause more damage
and pose a greater threat to human life than one generated
by a distant earthquake The waves originating from an earthshy~
quake in the Monterey Bay would probably be higher and not
preceeded by ample public warnings
Floods have damaged the downtown sections of Santa Cruz
Soquel Capitola and Watsonville many times in the past and
are responsible for causing the largest amount of property
damage The rainfall causing these events often reaches an
intensity here comparable to any of the highest intensities
seen in the United States
Major storms are common in the winter months and if they
dont result in flooding they often do cause heavy wave damage
2
to beachfront properties Strong onshore surges high waves
high tides and small winter beaches combine to produce seashore
property damage almost annually
Snowstonns are rare but they do occurorl occasiontdn the
higher elevations of the county The heavy burden of snow
when placed upon the relativelyunsupportive limbs of redwood
trees causes them to topple Personal property and communi
cation lines are particularly suceptible in light of the rapidly
increasing population of the Santa Cruz Mountains
And finally drought can place a severe economic burden
on the county which is heavily dependent upon agriculture Also
limited water supplies cannot sustain an ever increasing popushy
lation if an extended drought occurs bull
1 jtr 1 1bull
3
EARTHQUAKES
Santa Cruz County is located in one of the most seisshy
mically active regions of the world Numerous faults cut
through the county-namely the San Andreas which can produce
earthquakes exceeding a Richter magnitude of 80 Other lesser
known faults such as the San Gregorio are capable of generating
destructive magnitude 72 - 79 earthquakes The Butano Ben
Lomond Zayante Corralitos and Sargent faults are also capshy
able of destructive earthquakes though Qf lesser magnitudes
The potential for surface rupture is high in these fault
zones and care must be exercised when allowing construction
there Landsliding is also common and often induced by a
seismic disturbance in these areas Extensive alluvial deposhy
sits and high ground water tables in downtown Santa Cruz Watshy
sonville Capitola and Soquel serve to intensify ground
shaking and increase the likelihood of liquefaction These ~
areas are the most damage prone locations of the county and
are often the most heavily urbanized
The seismic record of Santa Cruz County although relashy
tively short has shown time and time again that most damage
occurs in urbanized lowlands built on loosely compacted allushy
vial soils with high ground water tables As urbanization of
these areas continues the potential for serious damage increases
Lesser magnitude quakes can now cause as much damage as some
of the larger quakes of the past merely due to higher popula~
tion densities and occasionally poor construction practices
4
The chronology that follows shows that indeed the damage
potential is increasing Only damage producing earthquakes
are listed Many more quakes have been felt but are not listed
as the resulting chronology would be far too extensive to be
included in this report
October 11-3111800
Major earthquakes w~re recorded at Mission San Juan Baushy
tista on the 11th and the 18th The most severe shock was on
the 18th and others occurred at a maximum rate of six per day
from the 11th to the 31st There was a considerable amount of
damage at the mission and all the buildings were declared damshy
aged and uninhabitable A deep fissure opened along the Pajaro
River and the October 11th shock was accompanied by a deafening
noise In Santa Cruz the historical record of Villa Branci~
forte makes no mention of this earthquake
1813 or 1815
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity IX or X occurred in
the Santa Clara Valley John Gilroy stated that all buildingsq
in the region shook down Had Santa Cruz been more heavily ~NJtP
at the time andearthquake of that intensity would have almost
certainly caused some damage heremiddot
A historical account of Mission Santa Cruz written by
Paul Johnson states that bullmiddot a series of earthquakes bull caused So
much damage that it took years of labor to repair the buildings
6
June 9-10 1836
An earthquake estimated to have a Mercalli Intensity of
IX or X occurred along the Hayward fault It created fissures
in the earth and shocks continued for a month IThequake
apparentlycaused great havoc in Monterey and Santa Clara
The intensity was VII in Monterey f A quake of this intensity
would probably have caused damage in Santa Cruz had it been
more heavily populated at the time
June 1838
A major earthquake of Mercalli Intensity X severely dam
aged the San Francisco San Jose and Santa Clara Missions
Buildings cracked and crockery and glassware broke at Monterey
(January 16-18 1840) Four sources state that an earthquake destroyed the Santa
Cruz Mission and a tidal wave carried many tiles to the sea
This story however has been discounted by the Santa Cruz
Historical S-ociety which stated in October of 1973
rr eOneof the bells cracked on its initial sound and one broke When the towercollapsed in 1840 No rain or earthquake happened on that date No excuse except poor material or workmanship
There is also no record of this quake in the History of Villa
Branciforte although it is thought that a severe storm did
occur
July) 1841
Within a period of two months 120 shocks were felt in
the Monterey area and some were felt at sea On July 3rd j
there was a possible severe shock in Monterey Ba~ This may
also be the same event which reportedly caused damage to
Mission Santa Cruz in 1845
7
January 9 and 20 l85
A major earthquake struck the Fert Tejon area of Southern
California on January 9th It was felt from the Northern
Sacramento Valley south to San Diego Two of the shocks were
felt in Santa Cruz and one is deemed responsible for the
collapse of the front wall of the mission which was already
weakened by its construction on water-logged soil Another
quake--(maybe local in origin) on January 20th had a Rossishy
Forell Intensity of middotV ~andfurther weakened the structure
Thirty-eight days later the southwest corner of the building
fell without the aid of any further earthquakes
October 8 1865
The most sever~ shock since the annexation of the terrishy
tory occurred on this date in 1865 The quake was probably
centered on[~the San Andreas poundaul t in the Santa Cruz Mountains
and is known as one of the five largest quakes to strike the
San Francisco Bay region in historic t~mes The Richter Magshy
nitude was estimated at 70-73~~and dam~ge in the City of San
Francisco amounted to $500000
The first dispatch from Santa Cruz stated that every
brick building here is ruined Total losses in the City of
Santa Cruz were estimated at $10000 In Watsonville $2000
in damage was done $1500 of which occurred at the Pajaro
Flouring Mills It was stated that every merchant in town lost
between $10 and $150 in crockery and glassware Well construcshy
ted buildings or those built on solid ground suffered little
or no damage Cracks appeared on the banks of the Pajaro River
ranging from 10-15 inches wide and hundreds of yards long
8
Highest intensities were felt in the Santa Cruz Mountains
between Santa Cruz and San Jose bull Chimneys fell along Santa
Cruz Gap Road and landsliding boulders blocked the highway
There were broken water mains and gas pipes along with a deep
crevice in one street At Mountain Charley~s along the same
road steam and water were thrown up through cracks and dust
clouds were ejected from drier soils
Wells and streams in Santa Cruz County were markedly
affected as many of their volumes doubled Water also boiled
up from the ground for half an hour after the shock This
was observed at the old Mission orchard
In Monterey Bay the quake was also felt as a fisherman
of Captain Davenports Whaling Company saidthat the wave motion
was rough a~d cross-cutting Immediately after the sea was
calm as a mill pond bullwhile the bay was full of little bubbles
rising to the surface Near Soquel the sea was reported to
be rising and ~alling with convulsive throbs carrying some of
the high cliffs into the sea
Personalaccounts describe the shock as one of great
force but doing little major damage Large objects were moved
about l8inches in some cases Many coal-oil lamps were not
btokerit)~but set spinning from the jolting motion as they were
knocked off of mantles The ground settled along the San Loshy
renzo River cracking the soil along its banks several inches
wide Somelsmall cracks emitted jets of water two to four feet
high for several minutes
October 21 1868
On this date a great earthquake claimed 30 lives ~d
9
caused $350000 worth of property damage in the City of San
Francisco In Santa Cruz thequake had a Rossi-Forel 1_ Intenshy
sity of VIII and brick buildings were cracked but none toppled
The quake was believed to have been centered on the Hayward
fault with an estimated Richter Magnitude between 70 and 73
In Santa Cruz the chimneysmiddot that toppled were often the
ones that fe~~l before in 1865 ~ The Court House experienced
some cracking of plaster and a 50-foot wide debris landslide
at Eagle Glen carried rocks and trees 1000 feet In Soquel
a few chimney~ were dislocated and plastering suffered in
Watsonville
March 30 HB83
Nine shocks were felt in Watsonville and three in Santa
Cruz Slight damage was reported in Watsonville and Santa Cruz
Some clocks stopped in Watsonville
March 30 1885
A strong earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VI in Monterey
op~ned cracks along the Pajaro River
April 24 ~ 1890
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VII to IX shook the
Monterey Bay region on this date Damage was very light in
Santa Cruz but many chimney~ _- were thrown down in Watsonville
Ground fissures opened in the San Andreas fault ~one near
Chittenden and the railroad bridge over the Pajaro River there
was displaced 18 inches Landslides closed the railroad and
highway at Chittenden Pass~ Walls cracked plaster fell and
some windows broke but damage was not as great as in 1868
At Glenwood the ground cracked in several places and at Boulder
lO
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
to beachfront properties Strong onshore surges high waves
high tides and small winter beaches combine to produce seashore
property damage almost annually
Snowstonns are rare but they do occurorl occasiontdn the
higher elevations of the county The heavy burden of snow
when placed upon the relativelyunsupportive limbs of redwood
trees causes them to topple Personal property and communi
cation lines are particularly suceptible in light of the rapidly
increasing population of the Santa Cruz Mountains
And finally drought can place a severe economic burden
on the county which is heavily dependent upon agriculture Also
limited water supplies cannot sustain an ever increasing popushy
lation if an extended drought occurs bull
1 jtr 1 1bull
3
EARTHQUAKES
Santa Cruz County is located in one of the most seisshy
mically active regions of the world Numerous faults cut
through the county-namely the San Andreas which can produce
earthquakes exceeding a Richter magnitude of 80 Other lesser
known faults such as the San Gregorio are capable of generating
destructive magnitude 72 - 79 earthquakes The Butano Ben
Lomond Zayante Corralitos and Sargent faults are also capshy
able of destructive earthquakes though Qf lesser magnitudes
The potential for surface rupture is high in these fault
zones and care must be exercised when allowing construction
there Landsliding is also common and often induced by a
seismic disturbance in these areas Extensive alluvial deposhy
sits and high ground water tables in downtown Santa Cruz Watshy
sonville Capitola and Soquel serve to intensify ground
shaking and increase the likelihood of liquefaction These ~
areas are the most damage prone locations of the county and
are often the most heavily urbanized
The seismic record of Santa Cruz County although relashy
tively short has shown time and time again that most damage
occurs in urbanized lowlands built on loosely compacted allushy
vial soils with high ground water tables As urbanization of
these areas continues the potential for serious damage increases
Lesser magnitude quakes can now cause as much damage as some
of the larger quakes of the past merely due to higher popula~
tion densities and occasionally poor construction practices
4
The chronology that follows shows that indeed the damage
potential is increasing Only damage producing earthquakes
are listed Many more quakes have been felt but are not listed
as the resulting chronology would be far too extensive to be
included in this report
October 11-3111800
Major earthquakes w~re recorded at Mission San Juan Baushy
tista on the 11th and the 18th The most severe shock was on
the 18th and others occurred at a maximum rate of six per day
from the 11th to the 31st There was a considerable amount of
damage at the mission and all the buildings were declared damshy
aged and uninhabitable A deep fissure opened along the Pajaro
River and the October 11th shock was accompanied by a deafening
noise In Santa Cruz the historical record of Villa Branci~
forte makes no mention of this earthquake
1813 or 1815
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity IX or X occurred in
the Santa Clara Valley John Gilroy stated that all buildingsq
in the region shook down Had Santa Cruz been more heavily ~NJtP
at the time andearthquake of that intensity would have almost
certainly caused some damage heremiddot
A historical account of Mission Santa Cruz written by
Paul Johnson states that bullmiddot a series of earthquakes bull caused So
much damage that it took years of labor to repair the buildings
6
June 9-10 1836
An earthquake estimated to have a Mercalli Intensity of
IX or X occurred along the Hayward fault It created fissures
in the earth and shocks continued for a month IThequake
apparentlycaused great havoc in Monterey and Santa Clara
The intensity was VII in Monterey f A quake of this intensity
would probably have caused damage in Santa Cruz had it been
more heavily populated at the time
June 1838
A major earthquake of Mercalli Intensity X severely dam
aged the San Francisco San Jose and Santa Clara Missions
Buildings cracked and crockery and glassware broke at Monterey
(January 16-18 1840) Four sources state that an earthquake destroyed the Santa
Cruz Mission and a tidal wave carried many tiles to the sea
This story however has been discounted by the Santa Cruz
Historical S-ociety which stated in October of 1973
rr eOneof the bells cracked on its initial sound and one broke When the towercollapsed in 1840 No rain or earthquake happened on that date No excuse except poor material or workmanship
There is also no record of this quake in the History of Villa
Branciforte although it is thought that a severe storm did
occur
July) 1841
Within a period of two months 120 shocks were felt in
the Monterey area and some were felt at sea On July 3rd j
there was a possible severe shock in Monterey Ba~ This may
also be the same event which reportedly caused damage to
Mission Santa Cruz in 1845
7
January 9 and 20 l85
A major earthquake struck the Fert Tejon area of Southern
California on January 9th It was felt from the Northern
Sacramento Valley south to San Diego Two of the shocks were
felt in Santa Cruz and one is deemed responsible for the
collapse of the front wall of the mission which was already
weakened by its construction on water-logged soil Another
quake--(maybe local in origin) on January 20th had a Rossishy
Forell Intensity of middotV ~andfurther weakened the structure
Thirty-eight days later the southwest corner of the building
fell without the aid of any further earthquakes
October 8 1865
The most sever~ shock since the annexation of the terrishy
tory occurred on this date in 1865 The quake was probably
centered on[~the San Andreas poundaul t in the Santa Cruz Mountains
and is known as one of the five largest quakes to strike the
San Francisco Bay region in historic t~mes The Richter Magshy
nitude was estimated at 70-73~~and dam~ge in the City of San
Francisco amounted to $500000
The first dispatch from Santa Cruz stated that every
brick building here is ruined Total losses in the City of
Santa Cruz were estimated at $10000 In Watsonville $2000
in damage was done $1500 of which occurred at the Pajaro
Flouring Mills It was stated that every merchant in town lost
between $10 and $150 in crockery and glassware Well construcshy
ted buildings or those built on solid ground suffered little
or no damage Cracks appeared on the banks of the Pajaro River
ranging from 10-15 inches wide and hundreds of yards long
8
Highest intensities were felt in the Santa Cruz Mountains
between Santa Cruz and San Jose bull Chimneys fell along Santa
Cruz Gap Road and landsliding boulders blocked the highway
There were broken water mains and gas pipes along with a deep
crevice in one street At Mountain Charley~s along the same
road steam and water were thrown up through cracks and dust
clouds were ejected from drier soils
Wells and streams in Santa Cruz County were markedly
affected as many of their volumes doubled Water also boiled
up from the ground for half an hour after the shock This
was observed at the old Mission orchard
In Monterey Bay the quake was also felt as a fisherman
of Captain Davenports Whaling Company saidthat the wave motion
was rough a~d cross-cutting Immediately after the sea was
calm as a mill pond bullwhile the bay was full of little bubbles
rising to the surface Near Soquel the sea was reported to
be rising and ~alling with convulsive throbs carrying some of
the high cliffs into the sea
Personalaccounts describe the shock as one of great
force but doing little major damage Large objects were moved
about l8inches in some cases Many coal-oil lamps were not
btokerit)~but set spinning from the jolting motion as they were
knocked off of mantles The ground settled along the San Loshy
renzo River cracking the soil along its banks several inches
wide Somelsmall cracks emitted jets of water two to four feet
high for several minutes
October 21 1868
On this date a great earthquake claimed 30 lives ~d
9
caused $350000 worth of property damage in the City of San
Francisco In Santa Cruz thequake had a Rossi-Forel 1_ Intenshy
sity of VIII and brick buildings were cracked but none toppled
The quake was believed to have been centered on the Hayward
fault with an estimated Richter Magnitude between 70 and 73
In Santa Cruz the chimneysmiddot that toppled were often the
ones that fe~~l before in 1865 ~ The Court House experienced
some cracking of plaster and a 50-foot wide debris landslide
at Eagle Glen carried rocks and trees 1000 feet In Soquel
a few chimney~ were dislocated and plastering suffered in
Watsonville
March 30 HB83
Nine shocks were felt in Watsonville and three in Santa
Cruz Slight damage was reported in Watsonville and Santa Cruz
Some clocks stopped in Watsonville
March 30 1885
A strong earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VI in Monterey
op~ned cracks along the Pajaro River
April 24 ~ 1890
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VII to IX shook the
Monterey Bay region on this date Damage was very light in
Santa Cruz but many chimney~ _- were thrown down in Watsonville
Ground fissures opened in the San Andreas fault ~one near
Chittenden and the railroad bridge over the Pajaro River there
was displaced 18 inches Landslides closed the railroad and
highway at Chittenden Pass~ Walls cracked plaster fell and
some windows broke but damage was not as great as in 1868
At Glenwood the ground cracked in several places and at Boulder
lO
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
EARTHQUAKES
Santa Cruz County is located in one of the most seisshy
mically active regions of the world Numerous faults cut
through the county-namely the San Andreas which can produce
earthquakes exceeding a Richter magnitude of 80 Other lesser
known faults such as the San Gregorio are capable of generating
destructive magnitude 72 - 79 earthquakes The Butano Ben
Lomond Zayante Corralitos and Sargent faults are also capshy
able of destructive earthquakes though Qf lesser magnitudes
The potential for surface rupture is high in these fault
zones and care must be exercised when allowing construction
there Landsliding is also common and often induced by a
seismic disturbance in these areas Extensive alluvial deposhy
sits and high ground water tables in downtown Santa Cruz Watshy
sonville Capitola and Soquel serve to intensify ground
shaking and increase the likelihood of liquefaction These ~
areas are the most damage prone locations of the county and
are often the most heavily urbanized
The seismic record of Santa Cruz County although relashy
tively short has shown time and time again that most damage
occurs in urbanized lowlands built on loosely compacted allushy
vial soils with high ground water tables As urbanization of
these areas continues the potential for serious damage increases
Lesser magnitude quakes can now cause as much damage as some
of the larger quakes of the past merely due to higher popula~
tion densities and occasionally poor construction practices
4
The chronology that follows shows that indeed the damage
potential is increasing Only damage producing earthquakes
are listed Many more quakes have been felt but are not listed
as the resulting chronology would be far too extensive to be
included in this report
October 11-3111800
Major earthquakes w~re recorded at Mission San Juan Baushy
tista on the 11th and the 18th The most severe shock was on
the 18th and others occurred at a maximum rate of six per day
from the 11th to the 31st There was a considerable amount of
damage at the mission and all the buildings were declared damshy
aged and uninhabitable A deep fissure opened along the Pajaro
River and the October 11th shock was accompanied by a deafening
noise In Santa Cruz the historical record of Villa Branci~
forte makes no mention of this earthquake
1813 or 1815
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity IX or X occurred in
the Santa Clara Valley John Gilroy stated that all buildingsq
in the region shook down Had Santa Cruz been more heavily ~NJtP
at the time andearthquake of that intensity would have almost
certainly caused some damage heremiddot
A historical account of Mission Santa Cruz written by
Paul Johnson states that bullmiddot a series of earthquakes bull caused So
much damage that it took years of labor to repair the buildings
6
June 9-10 1836
An earthquake estimated to have a Mercalli Intensity of
IX or X occurred along the Hayward fault It created fissures
in the earth and shocks continued for a month IThequake
apparentlycaused great havoc in Monterey and Santa Clara
The intensity was VII in Monterey f A quake of this intensity
would probably have caused damage in Santa Cruz had it been
more heavily populated at the time
June 1838
A major earthquake of Mercalli Intensity X severely dam
aged the San Francisco San Jose and Santa Clara Missions
Buildings cracked and crockery and glassware broke at Monterey
(January 16-18 1840) Four sources state that an earthquake destroyed the Santa
Cruz Mission and a tidal wave carried many tiles to the sea
This story however has been discounted by the Santa Cruz
Historical S-ociety which stated in October of 1973
rr eOneof the bells cracked on its initial sound and one broke When the towercollapsed in 1840 No rain or earthquake happened on that date No excuse except poor material or workmanship
There is also no record of this quake in the History of Villa
Branciforte although it is thought that a severe storm did
occur
July) 1841
Within a period of two months 120 shocks were felt in
the Monterey area and some were felt at sea On July 3rd j
there was a possible severe shock in Monterey Ba~ This may
also be the same event which reportedly caused damage to
Mission Santa Cruz in 1845
7
January 9 and 20 l85
A major earthquake struck the Fert Tejon area of Southern
California on January 9th It was felt from the Northern
Sacramento Valley south to San Diego Two of the shocks were
felt in Santa Cruz and one is deemed responsible for the
collapse of the front wall of the mission which was already
weakened by its construction on water-logged soil Another
quake--(maybe local in origin) on January 20th had a Rossishy
Forell Intensity of middotV ~andfurther weakened the structure
Thirty-eight days later the southwest corner of the building
fell without the aid of any further earthquakes
October 8 1865
The most sever~ shock since the annexation of the terrishy
tory occurred on this date in 1865 The quake was probably
centered on[~the San Andreas poundaul t in the Santa Cruz Mountains
and is known as one of the five largest quakes to strike the
San Francisco Bay region in historic t~mes The Richter Magshy
nitude was estimated at 70-73~~and dam~ge in the City of San
Francisco amounted to $500000
The first dispatch from Santa Cruz stated that every
brick building here is ruined Total losses in the City of
Santa Cruz were estimated at $10000 In Watsonville $2000
in damage was done $1500 of which occurred at the Pajaro
Flouring Mills It was stated that every merchant in town lost
between $10 and $150 in crockery and glassware Well construcshy
ted buildings or those built on solid ground suffered little
or no damage Cracks appeared on the banks of the Pajaro River
ranging from 10-15 inches wide and hundreds of yards long
8
Highest intensities were felt in the Santa Cruz Mountains
between Santa Cruz and San Jose bull Chimneys fell along Santa
Cruz Gap Road and landsliding boulders blocked the highway
There were broken water mains and gas pipes along with a deep
crevice in one street At Mountain Charley~s along the same
road steam and water were thrown up through cracks and dust
clouds were ejected from drier soils
Wells and streams in Santa Cruz County were markedly
affected as many of their volumes doubled Water also boiled
up from the ground for half an hour after the shock This
was observed at the old Mission orchard
In Monterey Bay the quake was also felt as a fisherman
of Captain Davenports Whaling Company saidthat the wave motion
was rough a~d cross-cutting Immediately after the sea was
calm as a mill pond bullwhile the bay was full of little bubbles
rising to the surface Near Soquel the sea was reported to
be rising and ~alling with convulsive throbs carrying some of
the high cliffs into the sea
Personalaccounts describe the shock as one of great
force but doing little major damage Large objects were moved
about l8inches in some cases Many coal-oil lamps were not
btokerit)~but set spinning from the jolting motion as they were
knocked off of mantles The ground settled along the San Loshy
renzo River cracking the soil along its banks several inches
wide Somelsmall cracks emitted jets of water two to four feet
high for several minutes
October 21 1868
On this date a great earthquake claimed 30 lives ~d
9
caused $350000 worth of property damage in the City of San
Francisco In Santa Cruz thequake had a Rossi-Forel 1_ Intenshy
sity of VIII and brick buildings were cracked but none toppled
The quake was believed to have been centered on the Hayward
fault with an estimated Richter Magnitude between 70 and 73
In Santa Cruz the chimneysmiddot that toppled were often the
ones that fe~~l before in 1865 ~ The Court House experienced
some cracking of plaster and a 50-foot wide debris landslide
at Eagle Glen carried rocks and trees 1000 feet In Soquel
a few chimney~ were dislocated and plastering suffered in
Watsonville
March 30 HB83
Nine shocks were felt in Watsonville and three in Santa
Cruz Slight damage was reported in Watsonville and Santa Cruz
Some clocks stopped in Watsonville
March 30 1885
A strong earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VI in Monterey
op~ned cracks along the Pajaro River
April 24 ~ 1890
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VII to IX shook the
Monterey Bay region on this date Damage was very light in
Santa Cruz but many chimney~ _- were thrown down in Watsonville
Ground fissures opened in the San Andreas fault ~one near
Chittenden and the railroad bridge over the Pajaro River there
was displaced 18 inches Landslides closed the railroad and
highway at Chittenden Pass~ Walls cracked plaster fell and
some windows broke but damage was not as great as in 1868
At Glenwood the ground cracked in several places and at Boulder
lO
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
The chronology that follows shows that indeed the damage
potential is increasing Only damage producing earthquakes
are listed Many more quakes have been felt but are not listed
as the resulting chronology would be far too extensive to be
included in this report
October 11-3111800
Major earthquakes w~re recorded at Mission San Juan Baushy
tista on the 11th and the 18th The most severe shock was on
the 18th and others occurred at a maximum rate of six per day
from the 11th to the 31st There was a considerable amount of
damage at the mission and all the buildings were declared damshy
aged and uninhabitable A deep fissure opened along the Pajaro
River and the October 11th shock was accompanied by a deafening
noise In Santa Cruz the historical record of Villa Branci~
forte makes no mention of this earthquake
1813 or 1815
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity IX or X occurred in
the Santa Clara Valley John Gilroy stated that all buildingsq
in the region shook down Had Santa Cruz been more heavily ~NJtP
at the time andearthquake of that intensity would have almost
certainly caused some damage heremiddot
A historical account of Mission Santa Cruz written by
Paul Johnson states that bullmiddot a series of earthquakes bull caused So
much damage that it took years of labor to repair the buildings
6
June 9-10 1836
An earthquake estimated to have a Mercalli Intensity of
IX or X occurred along the Hayward fault It created fissures
in the earth and shocks continued for a month IThequake
apparentlycaused great havoc in Monterey and Santa Clara
The intensity was VII in Monterey f A quake of this intensity
would probably have caused damage in Santa Cruz had it been
more heavily populated at the time
June 1838
A major earthquake of Mercalli Intensity X severely dam
aged the San Francisco San Jose and Santa Clara Missions
Buildings cracked and crockery and glassware broke at Monterey
(January 16-18 1840) Four sources state that an earthquake destroyed the Santa
Cruz Mission and a tidal wave carried many tiles to the sea
This story however has been discounted by the Santa Cruz
Historical S-ociety which stated in October of 1973
rr eOneof the bells cracked on its initial sound and one broke When the towercollapsed in 1840 No rain or earthquake happened on that date No excuse except poor material or workmanship
There is also no record of this quake in the History of Villa
Branciforte although it is thought that a severe storm did
occur
July) 1841
Within a period of two months 120 shocks were felt in
the Monterey area and some were felt at sea On July 3rd j
there was a possible severe shock in Monterey Ba~ This may
also be the same event which reportedly caused damage to
Mission Santa Cruz in 1845
7
January 9 and 20 l85
A major earthquake struck the Fert Tejon area of Southern
California on January 9th It was felt from the Northern
Sacramento Valley south to San Diego Two of the shocks were
felt in Santa Cruz and one is deemed responsible for the
collapse of the front wall of the mission which was already
weakened by its construction on water-logged soil Another
quake--(maybe local in origin) on January 20th had a Rossishy
Forell Intensity of middotV ~andfurther weakened the structure
Thirty-eight days later the southwest corner of the building
fell without the aid of any further earthquakes
October 8 1865
The most sever~ shock since the annexation of the terrishy
tory occurred on this date in 1865 The quake was probably
centered on[~the San Andreas poundaul t in the Santa Cruz Mountains
and is known as one of the five largest quakes to strike the
San Francisco Bay region in historic t~mes The Richter Magshy
nitude was estimated at 70-73~~and dam~ge in the City of San
Francisco amounted to $500000
The first dispatch from Santa Cruz stated that every
brick building here is ruined Total losses in the City of
Santa Cruz were estimated at $10000 In Watsonville $2000
in damage was done $1500 of which occurred at the Pajaro
Flouring Mills It was stated that every merchant in town lost
between $10 and $150 in crockery and glassware Well construcshy
ted buildings or those built on solid ground suffered little
or no damage Cracks appeared on the banks of the Pajaro River
ranging from 10-15 inches wide and hundreds of yards long
8
Highest intensities were felt in the Santa Cruz Mountains
between Santa Cruz and San Jose bull Chimneys fell along Santa
Cruz Gap Road and landsliding boulders blocked the highway
There were broken water mains and gas pipes along with a deep
crevice in one street At Mountain Charley~s along the same
road steam and water were thrown up through cracks and dust
clouds were ejected from drier soils
Wells and streams in Santa Cruz County were markedly
affected as many of their volumes doubled Water also boiled
up from the ground for half an hour after the shock This
was observed at the old Mission orchard
In Monterey Bay the quake was also felt as a fisherman
of Captain Davenports Whaling Company saidthat the wave motion
was rough a~d cross-cutting Immediately after the sea was
calm as a mill pond bullwhile the bay was full of little bubbles
rising to the surface Near Soquel the sea was reported to
be rising and ~alling with convulsive throbs carrying some of
the high cliffs into the sea
Personalaccounts describe the shock as one of great
force but doing little major damage Large objects were moved
about l8inches in some cases Many coal-oil lamps were not
btokerit)~but set spinning from the jolting motion as they were
knocked off of mantles The ground settled along the San Loshy
renzo River cracking the soil along its banks several inches
wide Somelsmall cracks emitted jets of water two to four feet
high for several minutes
October 21 1868
On this date a great earthquake claimed 30 lives ~d
9
caused $350000 worth of property damage in the City of San
Francisco In Santa Cruz thequake had a Rossi-Forel 1_ Intenshy
sity of VIII and brick buildings were cracked but none toppled
The quake was believed to have been centered on the Hayward
fault with an estimated Richter Magnitude between 70 and 73
In Santa Cruz the chimneysmiddot that toppled were often the
ones that fe~~l before in 1865 ~ The Court House experienced
some cracking of plaster and a 50-foot wide debris landslide
at Eagle Glen carried rocks and trees 1000 feet In Soquel
a few chimney~ were dislocated and plastering suffered in
Watsonville
March 30 HB83
Nine shocks were felt in Watsonville and three in Santa
Cruz Slight damage was reported in Watsonville and Santa Cruz
Some clocks stopped in Watsonville
March 30 1885
A strong earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VI in Monterey
op~ned cracks along the Pajaro River
April 24 ~ 1890
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VII to IX shook the
Monterey Bay region on this date Damage was very light in
Santa Cruz but many chimney~ _- were thrown down in Watsonville
Ground fissures opened in the San Andreas fault ~one near
Chittenden and the railroad bridge over the Pajaro River there
was displaced 18 inches Landslides closed the railroad and
highway at Chittenden Pass~ Walls cracked plaster fell and
some windows broke but damage was not as great as in 1868
At Glenwood the ground cracked in several places and at Boulder
lO
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
June 9-10 1836
An earthquake estimated to have a Mercalli Intensity of
IX or X occurred along the Hayward fault It created fissures
in the earth and shocks continued for a month IThequake
apparentlycaused great havoc in Monterey and Santa Clara
The intensity was VII in Monterey f A quake of this intensity
would probably have caused damage in Santa Cruz had it been
more heavily populated at the time
June 1838
A major earthquake of Mercalli Intensity X severely dam
aged the San Francisco San Jose and Santa Clara Missions
Buildings cracked and crockery and glassware broke at Monterey
(January 16-18 1840) Four sources state that an earthquake destroyed the Santa
Cruz Mission and a tidal wave carried many tiles to the sea
This story however has been discounted by the Santa Cruz
Historical S-ociety which stated in October of 1973
rr eOneof the bells cracked on its initial sound and one broke When the towercollapsed in 1840 No rain or earthquake happened on that date No excuse except poor material or workmanship
There is also no record of this quake in the History of Villa
Branciforte although it is thought that a severe storm did
occur
July) 1841
Within a period of two months 120 shocks were felt in
the Monterey area and some were felt at sea On July 3rd j
there was a possible severe shock in Monterey Ba~ This may
also be the same event which reportedly caused damage to
Mission Santa Cruz in 1845
7
January 9 and 20 l85
A major earthquake struck the Fert Tejon area of Southern
California on January 9th It was felt from the Northern
Sacramento Valley south to San Diego Two of the shocks were
felt in Santa Cruz and one is deemed responsible for the
collapse of the front wall of the mission which was already
weakened by its construction on water-logged soil Another
quake--(maybe local in origin) on January 20th had a Rossishy
Forell Intensity of middotV ~andfurther weakened the structure
Thirty-eight days later the southwest corner of the building
fell without the aid of any further earthquakes
October 8 1865
The most sever~ shock since the annexation of the terrishy
tory occurred on this date in 1865 The quake was probably
centered on[~the San Andreas poundaul t in the Santa Cruz Mountains
and is known as one of the five largest quakes to strike the
San Francisco Bay region in historic t~mes The Richter Magshy
nitude was estimated at 70-73~~and dam~ge in the City of San
Francisco amounted to $500000
The first dispatch from Santa Cruz stated that every
brick building here is ruined Total losses in the City of
Santa Cruz were estimated at $10000 In Watsonville $2000
in damage was done $1500 of which occurred at the Pajaro
Flouring Mills It was stated that every merchant in town lost
between $10 and $150 in crockery and glassware Well construcshy
ted buildings or those built on solid ground suffered little
or no damage Cracks appeared on the banks of the Pajaro River
ranging from 10-15 inches wide and hundreds of yards long
8
Highest intensities were felt in the Santa Cruz Mountains
between Santa Cruz and San Jose bull Chimneys fell along Santa
Cruz Gap Road and landsliding boulders blocked the highway
There were broken water mains and gas pipes along with a deep
crevice in one street At Mountain Charley~s along the same
road steam and water were thrown up through cracks and dust
clouds were ejected from drier soils
Wells and streams in Santa Cruz County were markedly
affected as many of their volumes doubled Water also boiled
up from the ground for half an hour after the shock This
was observed at the old Mission orchard
In Monterey Bay the quake was also felt as a fisherman
of Captain Davenports Whaling Company saidthat the wave motion
was rough a~d cross-cutting Immediately after the sea was
calm as a mill pond bullwhile the bay was full of little bubbles
rising to the surface Near Soquel the sea was reported to
be rising and ~alling with convulsive throbs carrying some of
the high cliffs into the sea
Personalaccounts describe the shock as one of great
force but doing little major damage Large objects were moved
about l8inches in some cases Many coal-oil lamps were not
btokerit)~but set spinning from the jolting motion as they were
knocked off of mantles The ground settled along the San Loshy
renzo River cracking the soil along its banks several inches
wide Somelsmall cracks emitted jets of water two to four feet
high for several minutes
October 21 1868
On this date a great earthquake claimed 30 lives ~d
9
caused $350000 worth of property damage in the City of San
Francisco In Santa Cruz thequake had a Rossi-Forel 1_ Intenshy
sity of VIII and brick buildings were cracked but none toppled
The quake was believed to have been centered on the Hayward
fault with an estimated Richter Magnitude between 70 and 73
In Santa Cruz the chimneysmiddot that toppled were often the
ones that fe~~l before in 1865 ~ The Court House experienced
some cracking of plaster and a 50-foot wide debris landslide
at Eagle Glen carried rocks and trees 1000 feet In Soquel
a few chimney~ were dislocated and plastering suffered in
Watsonville
March 30 HB83
Nine shocks were felt in Watsonville and three in Santa
Cruz Slight damage was reported in Watsonville and Santa Cruz
Some clocks stopped in Watsonville
March 30 1885
A strong earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VI in Monterey
op~ned cracks along the Pajaro River
April 24 ~ 1890
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VII to IX shook the
Monterey Bay region on this date Damage was very light in
Santa Cruz but many chimney~ _- were thrown down in Watsonville
Ground fissures opened in the San Andreas fault ~one near
Chittenden and the railroad bridge over the Pajaro River there
was displaced 18 inches Landslides closed the railroad and
highway at Chittenden Pass~ Walls cracked plaster fell and
some windows broke but damage was not as great as in 1868
At Glenwood the ground cracked in several places and at Boulder
lO
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
January 9 and 20 l85
A major earthquake struck the Fert Tejon area of Southern
California on January 9th It was felt from the Northern
Sacramento Valley south to San Diego Two of the shocks were
felt in Santa Cruz and one is deemed responsible for the
collapse of the front wall of the mission which was already
weakened by its construction on water-logged soil Another
quake--(maybe local in origin) on January 20th had a Rossishy
Forell Intensity of middotV ~andfurther weakened the structure
Thirty-eight days later the southwest corner of the building
fell without the aid of any further earthquakes
October 8 1865
The most sever~ shock since the annexation of the terrishy
tory occurred on this date in 1865 The quake was probably
centered on[~the San Andreas poundaul t in the Santa Cruz Mountains
and is known as one of the five largest quakes to strike the
San Francisco Bay region in historic t~mes The Richter Magshy
nitude was estimated at 70-73~~and dam~ge in the City of San
Francisco amounted to $500000
The first dispatch from Santa Cruz stated that every
brick building here is ruined Total losses in the City of
Santa Cruz were estimated at $10000 In Watsonville $2000
in damage was done $1500 of which occurred at the Pajaro
Flouring Mills It was stated that every merchant in town lost
between $10 and $150 in crockery and glassware Well construcshy
ted buildings or those built on solid ground suffered little
or no damage Cracks appeared on the banks of the Pajaro River
ranging from 10-15 inches wide and hundreds of yards long
8
Highest intensities were felt in the Santa Cruz Mountains
between Santa Cruz and San Jose bull Chimneys fell along Santa
Cruz Gap Road and landsliding boulders blocked the highway
There were broken water mains and gas pipes along with a deep
crevice in one street At Mountain Charley~s along the same
road steam and water were thrown up through cracks and dust
clouds were ejected from drier soils
Wells and streams in Santa Cruz County were markedly
affected as many of their volumes doubled Water also boiled
up from the ground for half an hour after the shock This
was observed at the old Mission orchard
In Monterey Bay the quake was also felt as a fisherman
of Captain Davenports Whaling Company saidthat the wave motion
was rough a~d cross-cutting Immediately after the sea was
calm as a mill pond bullwhile the bay was full of little bubbles
rising to the surface Near Soquel the sea was reported to
be rising and ~alling with convulsive throbs carrying some of
the high cliffs into the sea
Personalaccounts describe the shock as one of great
force but doing little major damage Large objects were moved
about l8inches in some cases Many coal-oil lamps were not
btokerit)~but set spinning from the jolting motion as they were
knocked off of mantles The ground settled along the San Loshy
renzo River cracking the soil along its banks several inches
wide Somelsmall cracks emitted jets of water two to four feet
high for several minutes
October 21 1868
On this date a great earthquake claimed 30 lives ~d
9
caused $350000 worth of property damage in the City of San
Francisco In Santa Cruz thequake had a Rossi-Forel 1_ Intenshy
sity of VIII and brick buildings were cracked but none toppled
The quake was believed to have been centered on the Hayward
fault with an estimated Richter Magnitude between 70 and 73
In Santa Cruz the chimneysmiddot that toppled were often the
ones that fe~~l before in 1865 ~ The Court House experienced
some cracking of plaster and a 50-foot wide debris landslide
at Eagle Glen carried rocks and trees 1000 feet In Soquel
a few chimney~ were dislocated and plastering suffered in
Watsonville
March 30 HB83
Nine shocks were felt in Watsonville and three in Santa
Cruz Slight damage was reported in Watsonville and Santa Cruz
Some clocks stopped in Watsonville
March 30 1885
A strong earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VI in Monterey
op~ned cracks along the Pajaro River
April 24 ~ 1890
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VII to IX shook the
Monterey Bay region on this date Damage was very light in
Santa Cruz but many chimney~ _- were thrown down in Watsonville
Ground fissures opened in the San Andreas fault ~one near
Chittenden and the railroad bridge over the Pajaro River there
was displaced 18 inches Landslides closed the railroad and
highway at Chittenden Pass~ Walls cracked plaster fell and
some windows broke but damage was not as great as in 1868
At Glenwood the ground cracked in several places and at Boulder
lO
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Highest intensities were felt in the Santa Cruz Mountains
between Santa Cruz and San Jose bull Chimneys fell along Santa
Cruz Gap Road and landsliding boulders blocked the highway
There were broken water mains and gas pipes along with a deep
crevice in one street At Mountain Charley~s along the same
road steam and water were thrown up through cracks and dust
clouds were ejected from drier soils
Wells and streams in Santa Cruz County were markedly
affected as many of their volumes doubled Water also boiled
up from the ground for half an hour after the shock This
was observed at the old Mission orchard
In Monterey Bay the quake was also felt as a fisherman
of Captain Davenports Whaling Company saidthat the wave motion
was rough a~d cross-cutting Immediately after the sea was
calm as a mill pond bullwhile the bay was full of little bubbles
rising to the surface Near Soquel the sea was reported to
be rising and ~alling with convulsive throbs carrying some of
the high cliffs into the sea
Personalaccounts describe the shock as one of great
force but doing little major damage Large objects were moved
about l8inches in some cases Many coal-oil lamps were not
btokerit)~but set spinning from the jolting motion as they were
knocked off of mantles The ground settled along the San Loshy
renzo River cracking the soil along its banks several inches
wide Somelsmall cracks emitted jets of water two to four feet
high for several minutes
October 21 1868
On this date a great earthquake claimed 30 lives ~d
9
caused $350000 worth of property damage in the City of San
Francisco In Santa Cruz thequake had a Rossi-Forel 1_ Intenshy
sity of VIII and brick buildings were cracked but none toppled
The quake was believed to have been centered on the Hayward
fault with an estimated Richter Magnitude between 70 and 73
In Santa Cruz the chimneysmiddot that toppled were often the
ones that fe~~l before in 1865 ~ The Court House experienced
some cracking of plaster and a 50-foot wide debris landslide
at Eagle Glen carried rocks and trees 1000 feet In Soquel
a few chimney~ were dislocated and plastering suffered in
Watsonville
March 30 HB83
Nine shocks were felt in Watsonville and three in Santa
Cruz Slight damage was reported in Watsonville and Santa Cruz
Some clocks stopped in Watsonville
March 30 1885
A strong earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VI in Monterey
op~ned cracks along the Pajaro River
April 24 ~ 1890
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VII to IX shook the
Monterey Bay region on this date Damage was very light in
Santa Cruz but many chimney~ _- were thrown down in Watsonville
Ground fissures opened in the San Andreas fault ~one near
Chittenden and the railroad bridge over the Pajaro River there
was displaced 18 inches Landslides closed the railroad and
highway at Chittenden Pass~ Walls cracked plaster fell and
some windows broke but damage was not as great as in 1868
At Glenwood the ground cracked in several places and at Boulder
lO
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
caused $350000 worth of property damage in the City of San
Francisco In Santa Cruz thequake had a Rossi-Forel 1_ Intenshy
sity of VIII and brick buildings were cracked but none toppled
The quake was believed to have been centered on the Hayward
fault with an estimated Richter Magnitude between 70 and 73
In Santa Cruz the chimneysmiddot that toppled were often the
ones that fe~~l before in 1865 ~ The Court House experienced
some cracking of plaster and a 50-foot wide debris landslide
at Eagle Glen carried rocks and trees 1000 feet In Soquel
a few chimney~ were dislocated and plastering suffered in
Watsonville
March 30 HB83
Nine shocks were felt in Watsonville and three in Santa
Cruz Slight damage was reported in Watsonville and Santa Cruz
Some clocks stopped in Watsonville
March 30 1885
A strong earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VI in Monterey
op~ned cracks along the Pajaro River
April 24 ~ 1890
An earthquake of Mercalli Intensity VII to IX shook the
Monterey Bay region on this date Damage was very light in
Santa Cruz but many chimney~ _- were thrown down in Watsonville
Ground fissures opened in the San Andreas fault ~one near
Chittenden and the railroad bridge over the Pajaro River there
was displaced 18 inches Landslides closed the railroad and
highway at Chittenden Pass~ Walls cracked plaster fell and
some windows broke but damage was not as great as in 1868
At Glenwood the ground cracked in several places and at Boulder
lO
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Creek babies were rolled out of their cradles clocks were
stopped and any amount of dishes were broken Shocks conshy
tinued for quite some time and on May 14 six mo~shocks W9~
felt but no additional damage was caused
January 2 1891
A sharp earthquake of ten seconds duration was felt on
this date In Santa Cruz only very slight damage resulted
There were reports of one broken window cracked plaster and
fallen clocks pictures and vases According to the Santa
Cruz Sentinel the greatest damage was done at the Model Drug
Store where many items were thrown to the floor The damage
at the store will not exceed ten dollars
(November 13 1892)
No damage was caused by this earthquake but the account
of it is interesting
This time it is a political earthquake and a pure Democratic one Such a shake Such laughterEven the Republicans joined in the laugh
April 30 1899
This quake was not reported by the Santa Cruz Sentinel
as apparently no damage was caused here In Watsonvill~ a
window was broken and some~nimneys toppled Crockery broke
in the surrounding areas and at Green Valley chimeneys and
cemetery monurnentswere damaged
July 6 1892
Another earthquake occurred during the same year in the
Watsonville area Some middotchimneys fell but most of the damage
was centered outside the county in Salinas where several lamps
and windows were broken
11
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
I
Figure 2 Early Seismograph Tracings 1892
12
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
April 18 1906
Although the epicenter of this earthquake was near Olema
north of San Francisco it carried with enough energy to be
felt over an area of 350000 square miles from Coos Bay-Oregon
to los Angeles Ground rupture was observed for 270 miles
along the San Andreas Fault from Shelter Cove to San Juan Baushy
tista
County was along the Pajaro River where a railroad bridge was
offset three and a half feet This was undoubtedly the most
damaging earthquake to affect Santa Cruz County in the historic
record
In the City of Santa Cruz damage was worse on the flat
than on the hills surrounding The~ourthouse probably sufshy
fered most of all when the cupola fell through the building into
the basement All along Pacific Avenue plate glass windows
were broken and some brick structures fell Mail service was
cut off formiddot four days isolating the city and causing many rumors
to start One of the rumors being circulated in San Jose spoke
of Santa Cruz being carried into the sea by a tsunami
It was estimated that one-third of the rcllimneys in town
were damaged and all bridges were declared unsafe Cracks in
the earth appeared near the depot and at the corner of Front
and Soquel Streets The road near the Riverside Hotel dropped
several inches All telegrap~lines between Santa Cruz and
points north were thrown down keeping the city uninformed of
the destruction in San Francisco for two days
Watsonville also being built on alluvial soils suffered
even more damage than Santa Cru~ An estimated nine out of
13
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Figure 3 Isoseismals of the April 18 ~1906 San Francisco EarthquakeRossi-Forel Scale
14
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
ten chimeneys were toppled a fire destroyed the Moreland Notre
Dame Academy many windows were broken and buildings downtown
suffered severe structural damage~ In the Pajaro Valley numshy
erous fissures opened some of them deep and extending for
several feet At the Granite Rock Company a rock crusher topshy
pled onto a train wrecking several cars Water tanks fell and
the Pajaro Bridge approach dropped three feet below the bridge
level Between Ellicotts and Watsonville the roadbed sunk
from ten to fifteen feet
Perhaps the most devastating and tragic events which ocshy
curred in the county were the landslides triggered by the quake
On Hinckley Creek nine men died as they slept in their bunkshy
houses and_the Loma Prieta Mill was burried by a mass of earth
100 feet deep The slide also dammed up Hinckley Creek creating
a lake SO to 60 feet deep Two men were killed by a slide oneshy
half mile long at Deer Creek and opposite Boulder Creek a slide
dammed up the San Lorenzo River Other slides were reported
at Corralitos Creek Henry Creek and Alma Residents above
Henry Creek stated that the quake rolled boulders as big as
a cottage into the creek and snapped off cottonwoods about 20
feet above the ground
Elsewhere in the county damage reports were as follows
Capito1a - Broken windows and Chimneys
Felton - Nearly all chimneys downed wires snapped~ and roads closen
Boulder Creek - All plate glass windows of businesses were broken
Bonny Doon - Clocks were stopped milk was spilled books tumbled from shelves eggs in incubators
17
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
were turned over and a general shaking up was given to everything
Scotts Valley - Fifty shocks were felt Chimneys were twisted or broken
Grovers Gulch - One home was destroyed by fire alongBates Creek above Soquel
Santa Cruz Mountains - Crowns of redwoods were snapped off at the summit Narrow gauge railroad tunnels caved in cuttingoff railroad service for three years
In general the disruption caused by this quake was severe
It sparked considerable interest in earthquake research and I~
data collection However at the time of the quake our limishy
ted knowledge of such phenomena may have allowed much valuable
information to slip by An example of -this limited knowledge
was even demonstrated by the so-called experts of the time as
reyealedstBQtb~ fcllOwlngl(lu~t~tiion by Dr JF Frisbee (an
e~pert on seismic disturbances) appearing in the Santa Cruz
Sentinel
Earthquakes form on the border of sea and land Earthquakes of an explosive variety~(referring to the April 18 event) are caused by the production of steam deep down in the earth
March 10 1910=
An earthquake of Merca1li Intensity VI in Santa Cruz
shook the entire Monterey Bay area In the central region it
was described as 2a slow rocking motion of alarming force
The3focus was much deeper than normal for earthquakes in this
region andS it was felt over a large area
Most of the damage was centered at Chittenden east of
Watsonville where houses cracked and bottles were thrown off
of shelves In Santa Cruz one window broke plaster fell and
20
I
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
some articles fell off of shelves in the lower parts of town
No damage was reported in the upper levels of town The town
clock bell rang with the shock
November 8 1914
The epicenter of this quake was placed at Laurel 1 mile
southwest of the San Andreas fault in the Santa Cruz Mountains
Some onimn~ysc fell and articles were thrown off of shelves in
the epicentral area where the Merca1li Intensity reached VIII
October 5 1220
Two shocks of long duration were reported on this date
The only damage caused was a broken plate glass window in Watshy
sonville
October 22 1926
Two shocks of Richter magnitude 61 shook the Monterey
Bay region Damage in Santa ClUZ consisted of toppled chimneys t
craeked plaster broken masonry tiles brokeni glass and strucshyt
tural weakening of brick buildings Most of the damage was
centered in the business section along Pacific Avenue At Aptos
and Davenport shelved merchandise fell
Februar 15 1922
A quake centered near Santa Cruz cracked some plaster
and threw articles f~om shelves No other county damages were
reported
December 30 1934
A quake on this date caused very slight damage in the
City of Santa Cruz Most of the damage amounted to cracked
plaster Apparently~ slight damage occurred in weakly built
structures and numerous slides were observed on Waddell Beach
21
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
---
Figure 4 Isoseismals of tbe Laurel EarthquakeNovember 8 1914
-------------------------~~----------
Figure 51
~1 fiU_ O MihhtU INTpoundNI1iamp ACORDUiG To $llEfUj~
REHIIENC[ Io~e i~ITlltn$ eorThfVQllte at43Som
H 5350m __ _
FvltJines (FrornpJcre Z V(JJ1D 8SSfR) ~~w
POIn1$ whare tiny or Gil tJl J jhcc f(~ W-(I _It bull
~ hltt11 WQI Ipllrtd Itot 1lt bull uti Qnd 3rd 5hvll
_II J Iho( It w -9shyLocaTions of $QI~moqtJPh storiOf74 bull stlE KI~0l1ERs ~~ l~ ~ I L middotc
uomiddot
J 22
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
February 12 1938
One violent shake of 35 seconds duration was centered
in the Monterey Bay southwest of Santa Cruz The only damage
reported was in the City of Santa Cruz where a chimney fell
and a window cracked
June 22 1947
Most damage reports from this quake came from Watsonville
where small objects fell plaster cracked and one chimney
toppled There were a few broken windows inSanta Cruz
December 16 1953
Damage caused by this earthquake was very slight and
located in Watsonville
April 22 1954
This quake was the first of two shocks occurring three
days apart Damage was light during this tremor where plaster
fell dishes broke and walls cracked at Aptos
April 25 1954
This shock was slightly stronger than the one on April
22 but did considerably more damage East q
of Watsonville
several homes were seriously damaged the ground cracked
landslides occurred cHimneys fell and windows broke Conshy
siderable damage occurred5iin the City of Watsonville where a
water main snapped irrigation lines broke plaster cracked
pictures and lamps fell a flagpole toppled the ground cracked
and concrete fell off of the face of one building Power
failures were also numerous
Other county damages consisted of fallen pictures dishes
and grocery items in Aptos fallen merchandise in Capitola~)
23
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Nbull N o
oo o o Sacramento
o
o
CALIFORNIA o Stockton
44 o o00
o
o
o
o o
o
o 4
IV
U S Coast and Geodetic Survey EARTHQUAKE
25 April 1954 123327 PST
~E~~lcO==~~~c===~~~o Scale of Miles
o
2 o 5
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
4 o
o
o
o
o
o o
o
o
o
o o
o
1 Figure 6 Isoseismals of the April 25 1954 earthquake
24
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond cracked plaster and chimneys
in Freedom and only one instance of cracked plaster in Santa
Cruz
March 2 1959
The SantaCruz Sentinel reported this quake to be the
joltingest to strike the area since 1906 Damage was very
slight in Santa Cruz but in Watsonville and the south county
therebwas more A few windows were broken and $500 worth of
merchandise was lost in one store in Aptos In Watsonville
a 20-foot crackappeared in the floor and a 15-foot crack
appeared in the ceiling of the Cityen Hall A six-foot crack
was also noticed in the wall of a bakery on Cedar Street
On Chittenden Pass a landslide was observed
September 14 1963
This fairly strong quake caused no damage in Santa Cruz
and only a few reports of damage from Watsonville The foot- J
ings of a bridge over the Pajaro River were damaged and some
pipes cracked A small landslide occurred and chlmney~ cracked
as did plaster and concrete
November 15 1964
This quake caused very minor damage in Santa Cruz and
Watsonville ~n Corralitos objects were thrown from shelves
and middotchimneys cracked c
October 14 1966
The magnitude of this quake was small (Richter 42) and
the only damage reported was cracked plaster in Watsonville
September 7 1962
Damage caused by this quake was limited to fallen store
25
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
CALIfORNIA
38l-fL~~~----It---7i~-===-+--=----------+----~ 38
limits of Felt Area
-
bull bull 2
bullbull bull 2
14 September 1963 114617 PST
I I 40 50
L----J Ld
bullbull bull bull
2 0
bull
123 122 121
3737
()
Vemiddot ~ -to
~ degemiddotltgt V4shy
3636
o 10 20 30
STATUTE MIUS
123 122 121
Figure 7 Isoseisma1s of the September 14 1963 Chittenden Earthquake
26
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
merchandise and other small objects
December 18 1962
Occurring only seven days before Christmas this quake
toppled many Chrisjmas trees but caused no severe material damshy
age other than cracked plaster damaged~nimrieys and broken
windows in Watsonville
March 30 1970
The only damage in the countymiddot resulting from this quake
was some fallen store objects in Boulder Creek ltAugust 3 1920
i~ihe epicenter of this quake was at the southern end of
Monterey Bay on the Continental Shelf The only local damages
reported were cracked plaster in Santa Cruz and the breakage
of a smoke detection head at Cowell College on the UCSC campus
April 16 1921
At Big Basin State Park cracks in a ceiling widened
but there was no other material damage reported in the county
from this quake
August 6 1929
A strong earthquake centered on the Calaveras Fault did
minor damage in Santa Cruz One woman in the San Lorenzo Valley
suffered a broken leg being knocked down by the quake Mateshy
rial damage consisted of broken windows cracked walls and
separated support beams in the County Buildingmiddot~which is built
on an old river bed There were numerous reports of animals
behaving strangely prior to the quake
April 25 1981
A small earthquake registering only 40 on the Richter
27
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
bull bull
bull bull
38
37
36
122 121
Earthquake Epiunter o Earthquake was feltbull bull Earthquake was not lelt
Small figure beside open circle indicates intensitybull is dillerenl hom lone designation -bull
bull CALIFORNIA
bullbull O 0 bullbull o I bullSon Jobullbull bull
I-IV
bullbull0 o 0
1
bull ~ Limits of felt area
o o
bull los lono
31
o
I-IV
bull o
36Aug 3 1970 2014214 PST o Mag 47 (m bl
o 10 20 30 AO 50 I I I I
Statute Miles o 20 AO 60 I E3 F+3 e===3
Kilometers
122 121
Figure 81 Isoseisma1s of the August 3 1970 Monterey Bay Earthquake
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Scale caused some minor damage in the Corralitos area At the
fire station there a large crack opened in the concrete floor
and there was damage done to a ceiling joist Some grocery
items were knocked off of shelves alsobull
Indicates that the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
bull(Date) - Indicates that the events occurrence is questionable
29
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
TABLE 1 DAMAGE PRODUCING EARTHQUAKES
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY ~ t~l~ (1r~ J~i_Tgtj_-~ ~-
u~--rO i Mrfl)E ( Date Epicenter Magni tud County Damages j lX~f(1~
1011-311800 ~an Juan Bautistamiddots IX~X Pajaro River area
1813 or 1815 Santa Clara Valley IX-X
1825 Santa Cruz
0609-101836 Hayward Fault IX-X
06 - la38 San Andreas Fault X)~
(0116-181840)Occurrence disputed
07 031841 Monterey -shy
0109+201857 Fort Tejon X-XI Santa Cruz
10 081865 Santa Cruz Mtns VIIIIX Countywide
10 211868 Hayward IX-X Countywide
03 301883 Hollister VII Santa Cruz Watshysonville
03 301885 SE of Hollister VII Pajaro River
04 241890 Monterey Bay VII Countywide
01 021891 Mt Hamilton VI Santa Cruz
04 301899 Watsonville VII Watsonville
07 061899 Watsonville -- Watsonville
04 181906 Olema XI-(83) Countywide
03 101910 Monterey Bay ~i VI Santa Cruz Watshysonville
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Date Jpicenter Magnitude County Damages
02 121938 SW of Santa Cruz VII-(4 bull5) Santa Cruz
06 221947 Gilroy VI-(50) Santa Cruz Watshysonville
12 161953 Watsonville VI-(46) Watsonville
04 221954 E of Watsonville VI-52) Aptos
04 251954 E of Watsonville VIII-53) Countywide
0) 021959 Gilroy VI-5) Watsonville
09 14196) Chittenden VII-(54) Watsonville
11 151964 N of Watsonville VII-(5) Santa Cruz Watshysonville Corrashylitos
10 141966 Watsonville VI-(42) Watsonville
09 071967 Corralitos VI-(47) Corralitos
12 181967 Corralitos VI-(52) Watsonville Corshyralitos
- 0) 301970 Gilroy-Hollister V-(47) Boulder Creek-~
08 0)1970 Carmel Valley VI-(47) Santa Cruz
04 161971 Monterey Bay V-(45) Big Basin
08 061979 Hollister VII-(59) Countywide
04 25l~8l Santa Cruz Mtns v-(40) Corralitos
Magnitudes are listed as Mer~lli Intensity followed byby the Richter Magnitude Af~~~f93l Modified Mercalli Intenshysities are used ~-----
5dUU) ~((tctPitU1 Q(rrt1L(101l (-lfLQ
Indicates +hat the earthquake was of close proximity or of sufficient intensity to cause damage in Santa Cruz County had the area been more populated at the time
(Date) Indicates that the eventmiddots occurrence is questionable
r
) 31
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Figure 9
ROSSI-FOREL SCALE OF EARTHQUAKE INTENSITIES
I Microseismic shock recorded by a single seismograph or by seismographs of the same model but not by several seismoshygraphs of different kinds the shock felt by an experienced observer
II Extremely feeble shock recorded by several seismographs of different kinds felt by a small number of persons at ret
III Very feeble shock felt by several persons at rest strong enough for the direction or duration to be appreciable
IV Feeble shock felt by persons in motion disturbances of movshyable objects doors windows creaking of ceilings
V Shock of moderate intensity felt generally by everyone di~shyturbance of furniture beds etc ringing of swinging bells
VI Fairly strong shock general awakening of those asleep genshyeral ringing of house bells oscillation of chandeliers stopshyping of pendulum clocks visible agitation of trees and shrubs some startled persons leave their dwellings
VII Strong shock overthrow of movable objects fall of plaster ringing of church bells general panic without damage to
buildings
VIII Very strong shock fall of chimneys cracksmiddot in walls of buildshyings
IX Extremely strong shock partial or total destruction of some buildings
X Shock of extreme intensity great disaster buildings ruinerl disturbance of the strata fissures in the ground rock-fans from mountains
32
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
IX MODIFIED MERCALLI INTENSITY SCALE OF 1931Figure la (Abridged)
I Not felt except by a very few under especially favorable circumstances
II Felt only by a few persons at rest especially on upper floors of buildings Delicately suspended objects may swing
III Felt quite noticeably indoors especially on upper floors of buildings but many people do not recognize it as an earthquake Standing motor cars may rock slightly Vibration like passing of truck Duration estimated
IV During the day felt indoors by many outdoors by few At night some awakshyened Dishes windows doors disturbed walls made cracking sound Sensashytion like heavy truck striking building Standing motor cars rocked noshyticeably
V Felt by nearly everyone many awakened Some dishes windows etc J broken a few instances of cracked plaster unstable objects overturned Disturbshyance of trees poles and other tall objects sometimes noticed Pendulum clocks may stop
VI felt by all many frightened and run outdoors Some heavy furniture moved a few instances of fallen plaster or damaged chimneys Damage slight bull
VII Everybodyruns outdoors Damage negligible in buildings of good design and construction slight to moderate in well-built ordinary structures conshysiderable in poorly built or badly designed structures some chimneys brok~n Noticed by persons driving motor cars
VIII Damage slight in specially designed structures considerable in ordinary substantial buildings with partial collapse great in poorly built structures Panel walls thrown out of frame structures Fall of chimneys factory stacks columns monuments walls Heavy furniture overturned Sand and mud ejected in small amounts Changes in well water Disturbed persons driving motor cars
IX Damage considerable in specially designed structures well designed frame structures thrown out of plumb great in substantial buildings with partial collapse Buildings shifted off foundations Ground cracked conspicuously Underground pipes broken
X Some well-built wooden structures destroyed most masonry and frame structures destroyed with foundations ground badly cracked Rails bent Landslides considerable from river banks and steep slopes Shifted sand and mud Water splashed (slopped) over banks
XI Few if any (masonry) structures remain standing Bridges destroyed fissures in ground Underground pipe lines completely out of service slumps and land slips in soft ground Rails bent greatly
Broad Earth
XII Damage total Waves seen on ground surfaces Lines of sight and level distorted Objects thrown upward into the air
33
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
TSUNAMIS
Tsunamis are large ocean waves which are generated by
earthquakes submarin~ landsliding or volcanic activity
They are characterized by their excessively long wavelengths
and high speed of travel which may reach up to 500 miles per
hour Tsunamis originating in the Gulf of Alaska Japan or
Chile are the ones most likely to reach our shoreline however
due to the long distance they must travel residents of the
Santa Cruz coastline usually receive a warning five to six
hours in advance of their approach The tsunami originating
from the Alaska Earthquake of 1964 was the largest in local
recorded history and Santa Cruz residents were warned well in
advance of the danger
Local events however may pose an even greater threat to
our coastline In a discussion I had with John Williams of
San Jose State University he stated that due to the deep water
unstable geology and high seismic activity of the Monterey
Submarin Canyon a tsunami coula originate within Monterey Bay
and inundate coastal areas with even higher waves and give
little if any advance warning of its approach Based on his O~ tIel- (W
data he states that the 100-year event has a wave height of -_ j ~l j bull
19 meters and a runup height of 10 meter He also warns I
I
that his data is based on the short tidal gage records of j
Fort Point in San Francisco which may have not recorded any
Monterey Bay tsunamis
Other researchers have worked out lOO-year event figures
34
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
ranging from 20 to 43 meters at San Francisco with runup
heights ranging from 10 to 22 meters Taking into account
the possibility of a local tsunami Santa Cruz County has preshy
pared inundation maps based on a runup height of 20 feet
The local tsunami record is even more sparse that that
of San Francisco and is largely based on visual observations
Thereforeby combining local observations and the tidal records
of Fort Point I have compiled the following chronology of events
Deoemoen 21 1812
A major earthquake apparently centered off the coast
between Santa BarbaraoandlltPointGConception created a large
tsunami at Refugio lin Santa Barbara County In San Francisco
one resident stated that the earthquakes in 1812 were so
severe as to cause tidal waves which covered the ground where
the plaza now is It can only be inferred from these two
reports that the tsunami prmiddotobably affected Santa Cruz County
although local records do not mention it
1830s Paul Johnson a Santa Cruz historian stated that after
the earthquakes of 1825 butresses were constructed to support
the badly weakened Mission walls in the 1830s
No sooner were the repairs completed than a tidal wave surged up river undermining sev~ralmiddot buildings and toppling the bell tower shattering two ancient bells
This event is highly questionable as the story soundsvery
similar to the erroneous earthquake and tidal wave story of 1840
April 1 1946
Two waves the first at 1015 am and the second at
35
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
1151 am were reported Estimates of their height ranged from
12 to 15 feet~and they pushed water many feet up the San Lorenzo
River At the wharf lines and buoys used to fasten fishing
boats suddenly went tau~and ladders down the pier into the
water were lifted to a vertical position as the swell passed
Malio Stagnaro of the Stagnaro Fishing Corporation reported that
a strong undertow continued to agitate the Santa Cruz fishing
Karbor the following day preventing boat owners from anchoring
their boats
The tsunami claimed one victim ane1derly Santa Cruz
manwho was pulled into the surf around the point fromCowe11ts
Beach No property damage was reported in the county The
origin of the disturbance was off of the Western tip of the
Aleutian Islands
March 28 1964
Several successive surges caused the water in the Santa
Cruz Harbor to rise lO~feet above sea level As the water reshy
ceeded the harbor was drained and boats were left resting on bull
the sand Damage was light The harborS floating dredge was
carried out to sea and never recovered and a 38-foot boat
disintegrated and sank 2GO yards from the shore
Several warnings were given to the public before the c~
tsunami Beach areas were evacuated and street traffic was
cleared Water came up to the Boardwalk steps and also surged
over the Esplanade seawall in downtown Capitola Water reshy
ceeded two-thirds of the way out under the Capitola Wharf No
damage was reported there The origin of the disturbance was
an earthquake in the Gulf of Alaska measuring 85 on the Ric~ter
Scale 37
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Since IB50 19 tsunamis have been recorded by the tide
gage at Fort Point San Francisco Most of these were visually
undetectable and only four of them were mentioned by Santa Cruz
newspapers One of these did damage in Santa Cruz County and
one claimed a life as mentioned before The other tsunamis
which were observed but did no damage occurred on June 15 1896
and May 23 1960 The IB96 tsunami consisted of two surges
the first one raising the water five feet The 1960 tsunami
was generated by anB6magnitude ear~hquake centered in the
Chilean ~rench and caused a succession of five-foot waves here
beginning at 1025 in the morning Also worth mentioning for
clarification is that a local tsunami long reported to have
occurred here between January 16th and IBth 1840 has largely
been dismissed as an error in translation It is believed
that a heavy storm was resposible for generating the large
waves observed on this date bull
38
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Figure 121 Coast and Geodetic Survey tide gage records of Tsunamis since 1850 Fort Point San Francisco
39
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
FLOODING
Flooding has historically been the cause of most property
damage in santa Cruz County Ma~ factors are responsible for
this perhaps the most important being construction on the
floodplain The entire downtown sections of Santa Cruz Soquel
Watsonville Capitola Boulder Creek and Ben Lomond are located
on floodplains and it is a little late to suggest that these
cities move elsewhere The high intensity rainfalls that this
county experiences combined with relatively steep topography
and small drainage basins has often produced flooding with
little advance warning Logging practices in the mountains inshy
creases the chance of log-jams and bridge washouts and mining
practices increase the basins sediment yield thus serving to
choke the river channels with silt
Following the disastrous 1955 flood in the City of Santa
Cruz levees were built and the river channel was straightened
in an attempt to mitigate the hazard The buildings damaged
by the flood waters~were cleared and the entire area was redeshy
veloped rather than left for park land open space or low-risk
usage In recent years the channel itself hasnt been adeshy
quately dredged and sediment has significantly decreased chanshy
nel volume to a point where the likelihood of flooding is as
great now as it was before the flood control measures were carshy
ried out Therefore ~ltbe flood threat remains with us Simple ecoshy
nomics tells us that the cost of dredging is too high to be
40
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
considered practical and it now may be cheaper to let the city
flood Of course there are other alternatives but they are
costly also We must now look at the threat from a different
perspective and deal with it as a fact of life and a natural
result of ongoing physical processes There are some areas I II
which cannot protect from flooding however in light of the con-I
tinuing rapid urbanization of the county it is not too late
to learn from the lessons of the past The historical record
can tell us a lot and it iswith this thought in mind that
the following nood~ehr9nology was prepared
1292 or 1793
On August 28 1791 Father Fermin Francisco de Lasuen
planted a cross 500 feet from the San Lorenzo River where the
Santa Cruz Mission was to be built A crudely built chapel
was then constructed there in September of 1791 According to
Phyllis B Patten (San~a Cruz historian) two years later the
hastily built chapel was collapsed by a flood due to heavy rains
After this happened the mission site was moved to a higher
level and the cornerstone of the second church was laid in
February of 1793 on Mission Hill
January 1805
Major flooding occurredin the Sacramento Valley
December 1849
Major flooding occurred in the San Francisco Bay area
January 1850
Major flooding occurred in the Central Valley of California
Winter 1852
The Santa Cruz Sentinel did not begin publication until
41
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
1856 and local populations were so small that data on pre-1856
events is lacking Works by local historians such as ES
Harrison in the 19th century are the main sources o~ data Mr
Harrison talked of the 1852 event as follows
The winter rains had fairly set in for two weeks there had been a steady downpour the creeks that a short time previous were dry were now running full and torrents of water were coming from the mountains and rushing withgreat velocity filling up the various ravines and creeks rendering them for a time impassableWork was pretty much suspended and about all o~ the population were assembled at the only tavern in the place
After publication of the Sentinel began anarticle in
the January 6 1862 edition made a reference t~ the 1852 event
It stated that the San Lorenzo River in 1862 reached a point
three feet higher than the high water mark of 1852 In 1972
a paper by David Casterson concluded from this in~ormation that
the 1852 event might be considered a natural though possibly
not normal winter flood for the San Lorenzo River
February 1861
Following a severe winter the dam of the San Lorenzo
Paper Mill collapsed on the San Lorenzo eight miles upstream from Santa c~uz According to Thomas and Alice Reedy the reshy
suIting wall of water descended upon the papellIlill apron and
all butmiddot destroyed it completely It is not known whether or
not the flood resulted from or preceeded the dams collapse
January 11 1862
The winter of 1861-62 proved to be an especially severe
one not only in Santa Cruz but throughout the state (San Franshy
cisco rainfall - 4927 normal 20) Devastating floods occurshy
red in the Sacramento Valley during the entire month of Decemshy
ber pernaps the worst ever experienced in California history
42
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
During January the storm track apparently shifted south and
Santa Cruz County was pelted by a series of heavy~storms for
nearly three weeks
The first serles of storms occurred during the second
week of January causing the San Lorenzo River to reach its
highest point (three feet higher than the high water mark of
1852) at 600 am Saturday morning January 11th According to
the Sentinel all dams on the river were swept away along with
numerous barns and large trees A two-story wagon shop was
reported to be surrounded by water several feet deep
I~ Tnis week damage amounted to $60000 in Santa Cruz and
surrounding areas It is not known whether this figure includes
damage done in Soquel where water was four feet deep in town bull
All dams on Soquel Creek were lost and some land was washed
away In the Pajaro Valley the entire towerportion was under
water Orchards buildings dams and mills were destroyed
along Corralitos Creek and a large number of livestock were
drowned Thirty four years later a publication by Phil Francis I
stated that old reslidents remember the winter of 1861-62 as I
the severest ever known since the settlement of the country
by Americans
The January 30th edition of the Sentinel spoke of incesshy
sant rains also during the third week of the month Considershy
ing the sparse population of the county in 1862 and the very
non-sensational newspaper reporting at the time the artibles
printed about the flood indicate that damage must have been inshy
credible
The 60unty of Santa Cruz has suffered considerable
43
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
loss from the devastations of the late flood and were it not for the general and extensive damage sustained throughout the state the destruction of property here would be considered enormous~
The storms of the third week of January resulted in conshy
tinued flooding of the Pajaro Valley while the San Lorenzo
experienced high levels although not as high as the peak flood
of January 11th Considerable amounts of land along the rivershy
bank were swept to sea and the river itself changed course and
ran several hundred feet nearer town than it did previous to
the freshet All roads leading into Santa Cruz were damaged
or destroyed as were the bridges The San Lorenzo Paper Mill
which was washed away in 1861 was again destroyed by this flood
A popular local ballad was even written describing the great
disaster
Attention all good people prayAnd listen to me what I sayIll try to tell you all the news About the flood at Santa Cruz
I then arose with all my mightAnd went down to see the sightOf all the sights upon that dayThe paper ~ill dam had washed away
December (23)1866
On December 20th a strong southwesterly gale brought
heavy rains to Santa Cruz By the next morning the Sentinel
reported that
The San Lorenzo River was booming full of water and driftwood was filling the channel from bank to bank At four~omiddotclock in the morning the current was within two inches of running over the bulkhead north of the foundry and at the low place where water Street crosses the bank was submerged
The paper mill dam was again washed away suspending opeshy
rations there until June of 1867bull Many roads were washed out
44
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
along with a bridge at the Powder Mill Numerous landslides
occurred in the Santa Cruz Mountains especially along the mounshy
tain road from Santa Cruz to Santa Clara which was rendered
impassable
This event caused so much disruption in Santa Cruz that
for the first time the construction of levees was considered
In an article appearing in the Sentinel of February 7 1862
titledemiddotlhelnundatiJon and the Remedy the following was said
Doubts have been expressed by some in reference to the financial scheme or rais~ng means to build a levee With the protection afforded by the embankment no such risks need be run The land now worthless
February (10) 1862
During the second week of February discharge of the San
Lorenzo River reached bankfull stage Water went over the bulkshy
head north of the foundry and flowed across many parcels of land
carrying debris with it All houses along the stream were
flooded and an island east of Front Street was covered with
water up to five feet deep There were homes built on this
island and many of the families living on them had to be resshyI
cued by boat Log jams occurred in many places and one of them
destroyed part of the footbridge at the Riverside crossing to
Branciforte Numerous landslides occurred again on the mounshy
tain road to San Jose
December 24 1872
The stage of the San Lorenzo River during this flood was
l8t inches higher than during the flood of l862ltbut surprisingly
only $10000 worth of property damage was done One-third of
the 240-foot San Lorenzo River Bridge was carried away but other
than that- details are sketchy Rainfrul records for the
45
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
10-day period of December 14-24 show that 28 inches of rain
fell in the Santa Cruz area
February (14) 1828
The Sentinel of February 23rd stated that
Monday the rivers were at flood-tide but not as high as the previous Thursday Between ten and eleven oclock in the morning the tide full rolled in across the Santa Cruz Railroad doing considerable damage
On Tuesday Pacific Avenue was flooded and any man that
has attempted to wade through bull at any time during the past
forty days is lost to society lost
January 25 1890
The winter of 1889-90 produced a remarkable 6319 inches
of rain in Santa Cruz and 120 inches at Boulder Creek Surprishy
singly only one flood occurred this was on January 25th Some
older citizens compared it to the floods of 1862 in magnitude
Nearly all of downtown Santa Cruz was underwater Many bridges
were destroyed and the city was completely cut off from railroad
communication Many persons were stationed on bridges to guard
against log jams by dislodging obstructions Damage was very
widespread but not severe in nature
The Pajaro River and Soquel Creek also flooded on the
same date Damage there consisted of washed out bridges and
raods and flooded merchandise in the downtown sections of Watshy
sonville and Soquel The Pajaro River rose at a rate of 4t inches per hour
January 18 1895
In a paper written in 1972 David Casterson reports a
flood in Santa Cruz similar to the 1866 event in intensity
The Sentinel of January 19th however does not mention a local
46
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
flood although it reported that Monterey was partly flooded
by heavy rains
March 23 1899
Disaater~JJepor~ampng1became poetic during this flood as seen
in the March 24th edition of the Sentinel
The booming San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek were on a wilder rampage Thursday than they had displayedin years They had indulged in a sort of turbulent gaietywhich would not be restrained From quiet placid streams they developed into bold aggressive defiant rivers They had become expansionists with a vengeance From a quiet sleep they had awakened to become wild angryroaring reckless impetuous masses of water which bulkshyheads and sandbanks could not restrain They leaped over their banks with the agility of acrobats and in their caresses embraced orchards gardens fences and houses
The water apparently did not reach Pacific Avenue because
the land between the avenue and the river had been filled in
Lower portions of downtown were underwater and the railroad
bridge there was displaced three inches by a log jam A young
boy fell from this bridge and drowqed in the current Some
homes were flooded on Soquel Avenue and a bridge was damaged at Big Creek
t~ovember 22-23) 1900
A log jam occurred on the San Lorenzo River this year
The exact date of the event is not certain but may have been
on November 22 or 23 when the most severe storm of the year ~
took place It is not known whether or not a flood occurred
January (21-23) 1909
Minor flooding was reported along Soquel Creek where themiddot
Justice Court Annex was surrounded by water Flooding also
occurred in Watsonville and the Pajaro Valley was reported to
have looked like a vast inland sea The Sentinel does not
it
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
mention whether the flood waters were due to the heavy rains
that fell during the week or from the Pajaro River jumping its
banks The main railroad line between Santa Cruz and Pajaro
was also disrupted by a washout occurring in the lowlands west
of Watsonville
March 7 1911
rThe San Lorenzo River and Branciforte Creek both left
their banksafte~ a heavy storm hit the area the night before
The San Lorenzo rose seven inches in half-an-hour and overshy
flowed its banks all along the line w Water overflowed onto
lower Pacific Avenue flowed down Spruce Street and flooded
all of the flats bordering the river Most of the material
damage caused consisted of the loss of land bordering the river
damaged bridges and downed communications lines The latter
two of these combined to isolate Santa Cruz from the rest of
the world for about three days by interrupting mail train and
telegraph service
Residents along Branciforte Creek claimed that the floodmiddot
waters hadnt been this high in years Water overran the Bershy
keley Way Bridge and flowed down Market Street to River Street
flooding the whole flat and forcing people to evacuate
There was little warning of the flood as one resident reported
that the water was high but not dangerously so at 1100 pm
By 11115 the water had overflowed the banks and surrounded
their barn forcing them to move their horses to hgher ground
Soquel Creek did not flood but the Pajaro River in Watshy
sonville was reported to be at its highest flood in memory
Water overflowed the banks and extended outward for three miles
52
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
in every direction Bridges and railroad lines were washed out
and the Pajaro Valley was again reported to resemble a vast
inland sea
January 1-4-18 1914
During the entire month of January Santa Cruz county
was pelted by storms Different areas of the county were affecshy
ted at different times and although the San Lorenzo did not
flood Pacific Avenue damage was widespread On January 1st
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and flooded the residential
section along the stream The same was true of Branciforte
Creek after 500 inches of rain fell in the San Lorenzo Valley
and adjacent areas A high tide also occurred at midnight
forcing the San Lorenzoc~to flow ove r its banks in the lower
sections of the city
The second flood occurred in Watsonville on the 18th
The area inundated was even more extensive than that of 1911
In some sections water was six feet deep and the entire section
of the Pajaro Valley from Watsonville to the beach was flooded
Storms continued to lash the area and floodwaters didnt begin
to receede until January 27th Damage was not severe because
residents were prepared and expected the flood
Jrf Jl~OnJahUahy 24th the San Lorenzo River reached its peak
high water mark of the season This time there was no high -
tide and no flooding occurred There was extensive wave damshy
age at the Boardwalk and a 200 foot section was ripped out
Extensive landsliding also occurred throughout the county
February 13 1926
A stormof record size and force moved inland on this
53
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
-
date causing extensive wave damage and sending the Pajaro River
over its banks in downtown Watsonville Flood damage was very
light however in Capitola the high waves destroyed many seashy
walls damaged the wharf undermined some buildings and sent
water flowing into the downtown section In Santa Cruz many
seawalls were also destroyed
March 27 1928
In some sections of Central California 18 inches of
rain fell in only four days Branclforte Creek was running
bankfull onthe 24th and reached a level within one foot of
the Berkeley Way Bridge One home was washed away and a 30
foot section of one property was lost On March 27th the
Pajaro River jumped its banks and flooded Watsonville doing
very little damage
December 27 193~
On Christmas Eve 658 inches of rain fell in Ben Lomond
in 24 hours No local flooding was anticipated but in Soquel
a large tree fell across Soquel Creek and sent wateroverthe
bank The flow of water was diverted and a 35 foot channel
was created across adjacent land The tree could not be moved
and dynamite was used to dislodge it No serious damage was
done
Three days later another storm forced Soquel Creek over
its banks In downtown Soquel the flood waters were the highest
in 20 years and covered a large area from the highway bridge
to the library on Porter Avenue Wooden cottages at the Willow-
brook Villa camp were pushed off of their foundations
and one
of the cottages $loated downstream lodging against the highway
bridge and damming up a considerable amount of driftwoood 54
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
The obstruction was later dynamited to keep the water flowing
All of the stores in Capitola were flooded and the Italian
Gardens near Paradise Park were damaged when the San Lorenzo
River jumped its banks there
February 211936
At 5s00pm February 21st the San Lorenzo River began to
rise and a rate of six inches per hour was reached at BOOpm
as the heaviest storm in 25 years hit the San Lorenzo Valley
All creeks were reported to be overflowing but the San Lorenzos
discharge remained entirely within its banks A series of
storms had been affecting the area since February 11th when
a record 12 of an inch ofJrain fell in 21 minutes
February 13 1937
Soquel Creek overflowed its banks and reached its highest
water level since 1931 Both downtown sections of Capitola
and Soquel were flooded although damage was minimal due to an
effective sandbagging effort A 24-hour rainfalllof SB5 inches
at Boulder Creek caused a rapid rise of the San Lorenzo but no q
flooding occurred
December 10 1937
The heaviest l2-hour rainfall ever to occur in the recorshy
ded history of Santa Cruz brought 335 inches of rain to the
city on this date In 36 hours time B46 inches fell in
Santa Cruz and a record 24-hour total of 904 inches fell at
Ben Lomond This deluge sent both the San Lorenzo River and
Soquel Creek over their banks The San Lorenzo overflowed
below the Riverside Avenue Bridge probably because of high tide
Along Soquel Creek one_cabin was washed into the stream and
51
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
destroyed Five bridges costing $50000 were washed out in
the south county
February 11-12 1938
Following 14 consecutive days of rain two floods hit
the San Lorenzo River within 24 hours Lowland sections along
East Cliff Drive were entirely flooded but there were no reports
of the San Lorenzo River jumping its banks in downtown Santa
Cruz Totaldamage in the ci~y amountedto $100000 although
the majority of this was due to severe wind damage done by the
accompanying 70 mile-per-hour gale
In Watsonville the PajaroRiveroverflowed its banks and
flooded 20 blocks of land The entire town of Pajaro was undershy
water also On the 12th anadditional 20 blocks were flooded
as the main Watsonville levee gave way marooning 1000 people
Total damages were not as great as might have been expected
(December) 1239
High water resulted in the loss of two Paradise Park
properties along the San Lorenzo River Information is sparse
February 27 1940
In 17 hours 875 inches of raan fell at Boulder Creek
causing the San Lorenzo River to surge past flood stage Most
of the damage was done to summer cabins from Boulder Creek to
Paradise Park Total losses in the City of Santa Cruz amounted
to $105329 and 320 acres of land were inundated One hundred
people were evacuated from their homes and many of them had to
be rescued by motorboat from the Garfield Street lowlands
Four foot bridges were lost and the Soquel and Water Street
Bridges were badly ~amaged On Zayante Creek six out of nine~
58
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
bridges were lost A total of 320 homes were damaged by the
flood with losses averaging $50 each
High water caused damage along the San Lorenzo River at
Paradise Park this year Information is sparse
November 18 1950
Water topped the banks of the San Lorenzo and flooded
most lowland sections along the river from Boulder Creek to
the ocean The damage caused was minimal however since many
crews were out breaking up log jams and the flood of very short
duration
On Branciforte Creek_the Boy Scout Cabin Grounds were
flooded at the end of Josephine Street Twenty days later
another heavy storm threatened local flooding but none materi shy
alized
January 12 1952
Minor flooding was reported on this date in the lowest
lying sections of the City of Santa Cruz Seventy five persons
were evacuated from their homes on Josephine Blaine Garfield
Burnett and River Streets which are usually the first areas
of the city to experience flood waters On Janu~ry 14th the
stage of the San Lorenzo reached 11 feet and further evacuations
were ordered but no flooding occurred The fact that no major
flood occurred may be due to the effectiveness of street departshy
ment crews which broke up log jams
December 23 1955
The worst disaster in the history of Santa Cruz occurred on this night following a three day deluge thathdropped 890
63
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
inches of rain on Santa Cruz and 1827 inches on Boulder Creek
Flooding began on the 22nd in the lowland areas of the city
and in Soquel six homes along Riverview Avenue were two inches
deep in water At first it appeared that this was the worst
that the flood waters would get until the forecast of more
heavy rain materialized By 9a)0 pm the San Lorenzo River
overtopped its banks along nearly its entire length and flooded
downtown Santa Cruz with up to 10 feet of water Dam~ge was
extensive and initial reports listed )0 persons missing Branshy
ciforte Creek also jumped ~ts banks and downtown Soquel was
inundated by the rampage of Soquel Creek
The San Lorenzo River reached a peak stage 10 feet higher
than the flood level in downtown Santa Cruz The Chamber pf
Commerce claimed that 410 acres of the city were underwater
and had the flood occurred during a high tide all of the more
than 500 acres of lowlands would have been flooded Total
damage in the watershed amounted to $8700900 and_ sevenpersons
were killed A total of 28)0 persons were displaced by the q
flood andlOOthomes were completely destroyed in the San Lorenzo
Valley some of them completely swept off of their foundations
Soquel Creek exceeded bankfull capacity for 18 hours and
discharge increased from 2000 to 12000 cubic-feet per second
in only four hours Downtown Soquel was inundated by five feet
of water and damage totaled $10)9000 Damage in Watsonville
was described as moderate resulting from the overflow of the
Pajaro Riyer
Some--years after this flood levees were constructed
~ following many years of debate
67
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Fig
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
February 19 1958
After seven inches of rain fell in Boulder Creek overshy
night the San Lorenzo River rose to a stage of 138 feet at
the Water Street Bridge or approximately one to two feet above
flood level In downtown Santa Cruz the river rose to within
inches of the top of the bank but in other areas actually
slipped over causing slight damage Jihe first place where
fl~od waters topped the bank was at Burnett Street where most
houses had already been moved out by a redevelopment project
Other areas where flood waters spilled were at Broadway Laurel
and Garfield Streets Some undermining of foundations occurred
at these locations but noserousrdamage resulted
1 l
The rains continued making the 1958-59 season the third
wettest in Santa Cruz history Rainfall totaled 4956 inches
in Santa Cruz 8691 inches in Boulder Creek and 7273 inches
in Scotts Valley by the seventh of April In a 24-hour period
on April 2 63 inches o~rain fell at Boulder Creek and that
storm sent the San Lorenzo River over its banks The rivers
stage reached 165 feet and caused considerable damage all along
its course One hundred and twenty five homes and 25 businesses
suffered water damage amounting to $20OOOO~ Car dealers along
Auto Row were forced to move several hundred cars to highergt
ground many streets were closed and power outages were numershy
ous Countywide about 250 persons were forced to evacuate their
homes and their was one fatality
Public warnings were very effective during this storm
Many county agencies pooled their efforts and cooperation among
74
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
TABLE 2 PEAK DIS CHARGES
STREAMS OF SANTA CRUZ COUNTY (Water Years 1956 and 1959)
Stream (1955-1956)
Discharge Stage (1958-1959)
Discharge Stage
Branciforte Creek 8100efs 2204ft 2450efs 1397ft
Pajaro River Chittenden
24OOOcfs 3246ft 23500cfs 3310ft
San Lorenzo River Big Trees
30400cfs 22 55ft 17200cfs 1776ft
San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
30400cfs 2)10ft 18500cfs 1847ft
Soquel Creek l5800cfs 2233ft 6250cfs l)24ft
Based on USGS data
r 75 I
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
the members of the community kept damage to a minimum High
water areas were well marked out by the~1955 flood and most
businesses were prepared to move basement and first floor stocks
to second floor levels Water levels were only two thirds of
those of 1955 and street crews broke up most of the log jams
before they could cause any problems
Surprisingly Watsonville escaped flooding and the Pajaro
River never reached the danger level Rainfall totals in this
city (2959 inches) were a full 20 inches below that of Santa
Cruz
January 31 1963
Over 850 inches of rain in Boulder Creek in 24 hours
failed to cause a flood on the San Lorenzo but the town of
Soquel was less fortunate Soquel Creek went over its banks
in downtown Soquel and water levels rose to within two feet of
the Soquel Bridge Damage amounted to $139000
76
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
~
1792-1793
01 1805
12 1849
01 1850
Winter 1852
02 1861
01 111862
12 (23)1866
02 (10)1869
12 241872
02 (14)1878
01 251890
01 181895
03 231899
(1122-23)1900
01(21-23)1909
03 07~911
0101+181914
02 131926
03 271928
12 271931
02 211936
02 131937
J
TABLE 3DAMAGING PLOODS
SANTA CRUZ COUNTY
Streams Affected
San Lorenzo River
Sacramento Valley
San Francisco Bay area
Central Valley
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Corralitos Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River County streams
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek
San Lorenzo River
Soquel Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Branciforte Creek Soquel Creek Pajaro River
Pajaro River
Pajaro River
San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
County streams
Soque1 Creek
77
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Streams Affected~
12 101937 San Lorenzo River Soquel Creek
- 0211-121938 San Lorenzo River Pajaro River
(12) 1939 San Lorenzo River
02 271940 San Lorenzo River Zayante Creek
1946 San Lorenzo River
11 181950 San Lorenzo tiver I
Branciforte Creek
01 121952 San Lorenzo River
12 231955 San Lorenzo River Branciforte CreekSoquel Creek Pajaro River
02 191958 San Lorenzo River
0402-031958 San Lorenzo River
01 311963 Soquel Creek
1 - -v~ P l -p lf) I c-rgt 1 IJ r vtIhiJiI)- j~ ~J lt1 -- I -CG(Jl Iu J Ii) l-l-shy
l~-ve-0 llCJo9~
J 1-0 vA11JlNtrr4 CPtJYI ~0middotrr5
Indicates that the mentioned flooding may have affected Santa Cruz County
(Date) Indicates that the date is in question
78
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
MAJOR STORMS
Major storms are a regular winter occurrence in Santa
Cruz County Not all of these events result in flooding however
many of them pack sufficient amounts of energy to cause severe
erosion and wave damage along our waterfront Exposed rocks
along many of the countyisL~beaches- aremiddoteasily erodable and
subject to undercutting and collapse bull Rates of cliff retreat
range from six inches to two feet per year and in heavy storms
those figures are greatly exceeded The vulnerability of the
cliffs varies from year to year depending uporLmany factors
among the most important being combination of high waves and
high tides beach width and degree of cliff protection the
nature of the bedrock and the amount of runoff flowing over
the cliff face
Some wave damage occurs along the coast annually and
it is therefore tedious to list a chronol~gyr2of-Gtbese8vents
The major events thowever are worth noting as~ltmany of these
storms produced flooding and considerable disruption in the
communities of the county These storms are listed in the
flood chronology Those that are not listed in the flood
chronology are listed belowwith anasterisk
~T
sectJanuary 1840 February 1926 January 1952
January 1862 December 1937 December 1955
January 1890 February 1940 April 1958
March 1899 January 1943 January 1963
January 1914 November ])949 ~anuary 1969
February 1915 November 1950 Jnuary 1978
Vl$ cJ IOJ 08Qt 6 J EZ1 u Cc-w1fr - ~
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
SNOWSTORMS
Snow is a rare occurrence in Santa Cruz County When it
comes it often falls in the remote higher elevations of the
county However as development is encroaching upon these
lands the potential loss to life and property i1ncreases Also
the redwood lumber industry which is extremely important ecomiddot
nomically can lose many trees when the heavy burden of snow
is~~placed upon the redwood s unsupportive limbs
In Santa Cruz County nine significant snowfalls have
occurred since 1882 Of these nine three have caused damage
since 1935 Another four unusually heavy storms in the 1880s
and 1890s would no doubt have caused significant damage if
the areas affected were as populated as they are today A
chronology of these events follows
Decemb~r 31 1882
This event was referred to for many years as the New
Years Snowstorm According to the Sentinel snow fell in
almost every section of the state including three inches at
Redwood City and some in the City of San Francisco Locally
three inches fell atLLorenzo remaining there for two days and
up to six inches fell at Ben Lomond Two anonymous accounts
of the storm follow
The ~lush~lnrthe roiadsj- oigtthegreat SanLorenz o~ Valley has been oceans in quantitybull traveling has never been worse in that section
86
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
The fall of snow north of Santa Cruz was unusuallyheavy bull drifting in places to a depth of from one to four feet Not a flake of snow rell in Santa Cruz but the weather of almost the entire week would indicate the proxshyimity of an icehouse
February 4-5 1887
An intense winter storm brought 475 inches of ra~ to
Santa Cruz on these two days Snowfall in the adjacent mounshy
tains was heavier than that of 1882 In San Francisco nearly
a foot fell between the hours of 200 and 800 am and this
record still stands today Four inches fell at Redwood City
and even a trace fell at Los Angeles At 700 am February 5
it was 35 degrees in Santa Cruz and 31 degrees in Monterey
Local snowfall data is lacking
January 1890
In addition to the flooding that occurred this month
snow fell in Soquel and covered all of the local mountains
According to Walter Noble of Soquel snow covered the ground
like frost
March 3 1896
A record snowfall occurred in many sections of Northern
California namely the Sacramento Valley Locally snow fell
at Boulder Creek Glenwood and Laurel It accumulated to a
depth of one foot on John Morgans place at the head of
Rodeo Gulch Snow fell on the shoreline at Pacific Grove and
the cold caused extensive damage tQ agriculture in the San
Francisco Bay area High and low temperatures in San Franshy
cisco on March 3 were 47deg and 33deg
J~uary 19 1935
An extensive hail storm occurred on this day causing
87
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
numerous automobile accidents in Santa Cruz Snow rell at
Glenwood and Lorna Prieta and a landslide slid halfway across
the highway at the two Big Blue Rock Cuts north of Glenwood
On the next day a record low temperature of 20 degrees was
recorded at Santa Cruz
(January 4-13 19421
Two sieges of cold weather occurred within 10 days There
was snow on the coast at Eureka and Los Angeles but none here
The severe cold however caused extansive crop damage estimated
at $25000000 statewide during the first siege Temperatures
dropped to 200 in Santa Cruz on January 1
The second cold snap began on January 9 Temperatures
dropped to 100 at Riverside Grove and ice covered both banks
of the San Lorenzo leaving only a narrow channel for the water
in Sant Cruz Several water pumps froze and motor blocks
cracked Santa Cruz City low temperatures for the 10th through
the 13th were I 270 240 260 and 230 bull
March 22 1964
A snowstorm dropped rour inches of snow and caused drifts
up to two feet deep in the higher elevations of the county
There were a few power outages caused by tree limbs falling on
power lines and also numerous auto accidents
JanuarY 3 1274
This storm did a considerable amount or damage Estimates
of the amount of snow fallen range from four to nine inches
with drifts of up to three feet at the higher elevations
Although the storm was not as severe as those of 1882 and 1887
88
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
the much higher population ih these areas greatly increased
the amount of proper~y damage bull laquo
An estimated 10000 of PG and E s customers were withshy
ou~ ~i~bt~iampity and 3500 of these people remained in the dark
for three days Eight hundred persons were stranded at work
school and on Highways 9 and 17 which were closed for some
time by snow and fallen debris Two deaths occurred during the
storm One man suffered a heart attack clearing fallen trees
and one woman was crushed by a falling tree and buried in
the snow An estimated one million trees were toppled by the
snow snapping hundreds of communication lines As volunteer
fireman Jay Baker put it trees were allover the place as if
a hurricane had come through
Other unusual snowfalls occurred on January 13 1907 t~
and January 14 1932 but the amounts were too light to cause
damage
NIISltql--Ofmiddot t e75~ 7c ~NOtJ hL- AUJlJG eZ11ctt-- Au_ d V 12fL-
~()AhJTJW~
90
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
DROUGHTS
Droughts are infrequent disasters that are very hard to
obtain information about Since they are long-term events
finding data about them requires an extensive newspaper search
which often only reveals rainfall figures amounts of crop
damage and water rationing data Nevertheless they do occur
in Santa Cruz County and must be dealt with particularly since
urbanization is tapping our available water resources to their
limits The demand for water is continually increasing and
so is the potential for a crisis in the event of another
drought like that which occurred in 1976-77
The definition of the term drought varies and has difshy
ferent meanings to different branches of science Agriculture
may assess drought in terms of crop losses and topsoil erosion
geologists and hydrologists may assess it in terms of low
water tables and meteorologists may assess it in terms of q
prolonged below normal precipitation Therefore using all
of these factors together plus drought s impact on human
services we can get a picture of the severity of a prolonged
dry spelll
In terms of duration droughts in the Santa Cruz area
are generally short lived They rarely last for more than
two years however those of the Midwestern United States can
last for several years A chronology of Santa Cruz County
events follows
91
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
1820-1821
Santa Cruz Mission records state that the years 1816-17
were very wet and 1820-21 were very dry
1844
A pre-statehood letter addressed to the inhabitants of
Mission Santa Cruz speaks of Santa Cruz first water rationing
Water was to be used only by designated persons and only for
essential purposes
1850-1851
A severe drought occurred in Northern California Rainshy
fall in San Francisco was only 74 inches or 33 of normal
Sacramento received only 50 inches of rain during this period
In general rainfall over California was only one-third of
normal
1862-1864
Following severe statewide flooding in 1861-62 a severe
drought especially in Southern California put an end to the
states extensive cattle industry
1875-1876
A very low water year locally
Rainfall over the entir~ Western United States was only
79 of normal
1910
Rainfall over the entire Western United States was only
81 of normal
1924
Rainfall over the entire~Western United States was only
92
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
1928-1934
6
75 of normal The Santa Cruz rainfall total was 117 inches
the lowest ever recorded
During this period there were seven consecutive years of
below normal precipitation in the City of Santa Cruz (220
172 bull 215 bull 130 bull 276 bull 214 bull and 185 inches) The years
1928 and 1929 were very dry over all of the Western United ~
States with only 79 to 80~percent of normal precipitation
In 1929 the lowest four-month rainfall total ever recorded
in San Francisco was observed
1976-1977
A severe drought placed an extreme burden on local water
supplies Water rationing was instituted as annual rainfall
totaled 122 and 150 inches respectively
93
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
CONCLUSION
Most of the historic record of Santa Cruz County dates
back to the year 1791 with the establishment of Mission santa
Cruz bull Although existing information from those (early years is
sparse the first natural disaster to affect Santa Cruz was
a flood in 1192 This event was followed by a series of
strong earthquakes in October of 1800 centered near San Juan
Bautista
It was not until the middle of the 1800 sltwhen middotmore de
tailed records began to be kept In 1850 the statehood of
California and the organization of Santa Cruz as a county led
to more written information In 1865 the first edition of the
Santa Cruz Sentinel was published and since then it has proshy
vided a more or less continuous recordsof local events
OVer a span of approximately 180 years 38 earthquakes
and 34 floods have caused namage c-in)Santa(3rUz County These
two events are by far responsible for most of the property
damage reported In the 1800s a damaging earthquake occurred
on the average of once every 61 years and a flood every 17
years However so far in the 1900s a damaging earthquake
occurs every 35 years and a flood every 41 years These
lower figures do not represent an increase in the frequency of
events but do reflect a rapidly growing population that is
more thorough and accurate in its reporting techniques Also
more people are likely to be affected by similar magnitude
events due to todays higher population densities
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
In summation floods are likely to cause the most material
damage in the county however earthquakes can be expected more
frequently Major winter storms are likely in any year although
damage is fairly predictable and often confined to the shoreline
Tsunamis droughts and snowstorms are very infrequent- events
and too little data exists about them (also too few events have
occurred) to accurately predict their recurrence intervals
95
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
REFERENCES
Anderson C L 1879 The Climate Botany Geology and Health of Santa Cruz and vicinity San Francisco W W Elliott
Barrows H D 1893 A Memorial and Biographical History of the Coast Counties of Central California Chicago Lewis
Beach W R 1974 Earthquakes in the lives of Santa Cruzans Selected Papers on the History of Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Bernucci po~ 1969 The History of the Villa de Branciforte Masters thesis San Jose State University San Jose California
Blaisdell F L 1967 Santa Cruz in the Early 1900middots Intershyview iJUniversity of California Santa Cruz SpecialCollections
Bolt B A ltfornia
Press
Bonestell C 1974 San Francisco
The Golden Era of the Missions 1769-1834 Chronicle Books
Burton Rbull -E 1964 Par Excellence
Samuel Leask Transplanted Scot Citizen Felton California Village Print Shop
Bushee Chamberlain Guelich Selected Papers on the Historyof Santa Cruz County University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections 1968
California State of 1974 Joint Committee on Seismic SRfetySacramento California Legislature
California State of 1959 California Floods of 1958 Sacrashymento Department of Water Resources
Carder D s 1965 Investi ations in the Western ~U~n=i~t~e=d_S~t=a=t=e~s~~~~~~ U S Coast and Geodetic SU~~YI 1-2
Rainfall in Senior thesis
Coughanour A T 1974 The Impact of the January 3 1974 Snowstorm on the San Lorenzo Valley Region Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Cronise T F 1868 The Natural Wealth of California San Francisco H H Bancroft
) 96
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
Farrington R L 1974 Active Fault and Landslide Hazards Along the San Andreas Fault Zone Santa Cruz County Senior thesis University of Calirofnia Santa Cruz
Francis P 1896 Beautiful Santa Cruz County San Franciscof H S Crocker
Griggs G B 1973 Earthquake Activity Between Monterey and Half Moon Bay California California Geologybullv26
Harrison E S 1892 History of Santa Cruz County California San Francisco Pacific Press
Holden E S 1892 Earth~uakes in California 1890-91 U S Geological Survey Bul etin 95
Hoover M 1937 Historic spots in California Stanford I
Stanford University Press
Hoyt W Gbull 1955 Floods Princeton Princeton UniversityPress
Iacopi R 1971 Earthquake Country Menlo Parka Lane Books
International Seismological Centre Various issues 1964- Regional Catalogue of Earthquakes Edinburgh Scotland
Johnston P D 1966 Aptos and the Mid- Santa Cruz County Area From the 1890s Through WW II Interview Universityof C~lifornia Santa Cruz Special Collections
Jordan D S 1907 The California Earthquake of 1906 A M Robertson
Koch middot 1973 -SantaCruz CoUnty Parade oftiePast Fresno Valley Publishers
Koster G H 1975 The San Lorenzo River Yesterday Todayand Tomorrow Senior thesis University of California Santa Cruz
Lewis B 1976 Watsonville Memories That Linger Fresno Valley Publishers
Martin E 19l1~ History of Santa Cruz County LosAngelesHistoric Record
Mc Hugh T L Mc Hugh Scrapbooks University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Mitchell GD Sep1928 The Santa Cruz Earthquake of October 1926 Bulletin of the Seismological Society of Americ~ 118
National Earthquake Information Center Various issues Mar 1967- Earthquake Information Bulletin Rockville Maryland
97
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Various issues 1928- Earthguake History of the United States Boulder Colorado
Patten P B 1964 A Brief History of the Santa Cruz Mission Santa Cruz Santa Cruz Chamber of Commerce
Patten P B 1969 OhThat Reminds Me- Felton Big Trees Press
Perrine C D 1893-1899 Earthguakes in California 1892-1898 U S Geological Survey Bulletin 112
Perrine C D Keeler and Holden 1895 Pacific Coast Earthshyguakes 176~-1895 U S Geological SurveyBulletin Col~ lection of 1ssues
Reedy T L 1967 In the Be~innin~ A History of the Paradise Park Site Santa Cruz Paradise Park MasQnic Club
Rommel H 1973 The 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Interview Unishyversity of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
Rosenberg N J 1978 North American Droughts Boulder Coloshyrado Westview Press
Santa Cruz County Chamber of Commerce 1956 The San Lorenzo River Flood December 22 1955 Santa Cruz Flood Conshytrol Committee
Santa Cruz County Officemiddotof Watershed Management August 1976 Preliminary Report on the San Lorenzo River Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Planning Department 1975 Seismic SafetyElement Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz County Public Hearing Draft January 1981 Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan Santa Cruz
Santa Cruz Historical Society 1958-1974 News and Notes of the Santa Cruz Historical Society Santa Cruz
Tannehill I~ R 1947 Drought Its Causes and Effects ~ Princetonl Princeton University Press
Torchiana H A 1933 The Story of Mission SantaCruz San Francisco P Elder
University of California Agricultural Extension 1976 Climate of Santa Cruz County Watsonville
University of California Bulletin of the Seismographic Stations Various issues 1910- Berkeley university of paliforniaPress
98
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99
University of California Santa Cruz 1844 Pre-Statehood Documents Letter 517 University of California Santa Cruz Special Collections
U S Army Corps of Engineers 1966 Survey Report for Flood Control and Allied Purposes Soquel Creek San Francisco
U S Geological Survey 1956 Floods of December 1955 - Janushyary 1956 in the Far Western United States WashingtonWater Resources Division
U S Office of Emergency Preparedness 1970 Geologic Hazards and Public Problems Conference San Francisco 1969 Washington U S Government Printing Office
Watkins R C 1925 History of Monterey and Santa Cruz Counshyties Chicago S J Clarke
Williams J W 1978 Tsunamis and the San Francisco Ba Area Coastal Zone middot78 Symposium San Francisco March 1 -161978- -NewYork I American Society of Civil Engineers
Newspapers
Santa Cruz Sentinel Various issues January 1865 to present
Watsonville Register-Pajaronian Various issues 1868 to present
Photographs courtesy of Special Collections Mc Henry LibraryUniversity of California Santa Cruz
99