2013 GNHR Kashmir Kangra 2013

This article was downloaded by: [Basab Mukhopadhyay]
On: 11 October 2013, At: 07:19

Publisher: Taylor & Francis
Informa Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered
office: Mortimer House, 37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK
Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk
Publication details, including instructions for authors and
subscription information:
http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tgnh20
Seismic hazard assessment of Kashmir
and Kangra valley region, Western
Himalaya, India
Basab Mukhopadhyay
a
& Sujit Dasgupta
b
a
Geological Survey of India, Central Headquarters, 27 J.L. Nehru
Road, Kolkata, 700016, India
b
Ex Geological Survey of India, Kolkata, India
Published online: 10 Oct 2013.
To cite this article: Basab Mukhopadhyay & Sujit Dasgupta , Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk
(2013): Seismic hazard assessment of Kashmir and Kangra valley region, Western Himalaya, India,
Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk
To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2013.832405
PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE
Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the
Content) contained in the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis,
our agents, and our licensors make no representations or warranties whatsoever as to
the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of the Content. Any opinions
and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors,
and are not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content
should not be relied upon and should be independently verified with primary sources
of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable for any losses, actions, claims,
proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoever or
howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising
out of the use of the Content.
This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any
substantial or systematic reproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing,
systematic supply, or distribution in any form to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms &
Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-
and-conditions
Seismic hazard assessment of Kashmir and Kangra valley region,
Western Himalaya, India
BASAB MUKHOPADHYAY,* and SUJIT DASGUPTA)
,
Geological Survey of India, Central Headquarters, 27 J.L. Nehru Road, Kolkata,
700016, India
)
Ex Geological Survey of India, Kolkata, India
(Received 22 December 2012; accepted 04 August 2013)
A complete earthquake catalogue of the Western Himalaya (latitudes 30
N36
N
and longitudes 72
E78
E) for the period of 15012010 has been compiled with

earthquake magnitude computed in moment magnitude (Mw) scale. Pre- and early
twentieth century records of earthquake damage have been documented from rare
and out of print publications. Seismotectonics and seismic hazard for Kohistan arc,
KashmirHazara Syntaxis, Nanga-Parbat (Western Syntaxis), Karakoram and
Himachal Himalaya are discussed with special reference to 1905 Kangra and 2005
Muzaffarabad earthquakes. Analyses of spatio-temporal variation in b-value from
the region indicate signicant precursor prior to the 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake;
progressive rise of background b-value observed and the main shock locates close to
relative high b-value domains. Regions surrounding the location of the 1905 Kangra
earthquake also display such high b-value for the period of 20052010 that calls for
closer scrutiny. Temporal analysis of b-value from the epicentral block of
Muzaffarabad earthquake clearly showed a highlow b-value couplet of 1.450.72,
which may be treated as a typical precursor before an imminent large earthquake.
Gumbel extreme value statistics indicate probability of occurrence of an event of
Mw > 7.0 within 50 years in the region.
1. Introduction
The ongoing convergence of Indian and Eurasian plates gave rise to EW trending
bow-shaped Himalayan arc with trend reversal at the terminal ends: Nanga-Parbat
in the west (Western Syntaxis) and Namcha Barwa in the east (Eastern Syntaxis).
Western Syntaxis (Nanga-Parbat and KashmirHazara syntaxis), an integral part of
Western Himalaya, is characterized by active uplifted dome with anks deformed by
seismically active shear zones/faults. The geodynamic interactions of these shear
zones/faults aided by deep erosion by river Indus and consequent mass removal
expose the exhumed Cenozoic metamorphic rocks, granulites and granites (Nanga-
ParbatHarmosh massif) originating from the Indian Plate. The Nanga-Parbat
massif is surrounded entirely by the Main Mantle Thrust (MMT) and bordered in
the west and east by accreted rocks of the Mesozoic Island arc system of the
Kohistan and Ladakh arc, and to the north by rocks of the Karakoram arc along the
Main Karakoram Thrust (MKT)/Shyok Suture (gure 1) and in the south by Lesser
Himalayan rocks (Naqvi 2005). Compression, metamorphism and ongoing
*Corresponding author. Email: basab.mukhopadhyay@gsi.gov.in
2013 Taylor & Francis
Geomatics, Natural Hazards and Risk, 2013
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/19475705.2013.832405
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

deformation have accumulated enormous strain within the country rocks over mil-
lions of years particularly in the frontal belt. The strain is released continuously in
the form of numerous small shocks with occurrence of periodic large earthquakes:
1555 earthquake (Mw 7.6), 1905 Kangra earthquake (Mw 7.8) (see also table 1 for
Figure 1. Tectonic setting of the Western Himalaya with special emphasis on 8 October 2005,
Muzaffarabad earthquake with its CMT solution; colour-shaded areas showing IKSZ (Indus
Kohistan Seismic Zone) and estimated locations of ruptures in 1555 Kashmir (Mw 7.6) and
1905 Kangra (Mw 7.8) earthquakes (after Bilham 2004; Avouac et al. 2006). Velocity of penin-
sular India (given in arrow head with value) relative to stable Eurasia computed from the Euler
pole of the Indian Plate determined by Bettinelli et al. (2006). ISZ: Indus Suture Zone; KF:
Karakoram Fault; MFT: Main Frontal Thrust; MBT: Main Boundary Thrust; MMT: Main
Mantle Thrust; SRT: Salt Range Thrust; MCT: Main Central Thrust; MKT: Main
Karakoram Thrust; NP: Nanga-Parbat; SS: Shyok Suture.
2 B. Mukhopadhyay and S. Dasgupta
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

T
a
b
l
e
1
.
C
h
r
o
n
o
l
o
g
i
c
a
l
l
i
s
t
i
n
g
o
f
e
a
r
t
h
q
u
a
k
e
s
f
r
o
m
1
5
0
0
t
o
1
9
6
3
(
a
r
e
a
l
a
t
i
t
u
d
e
3
0
3
6
N
a
n
d
l
o
n
g
i
t
u
d
e
7
2
7
8
E
)
.
N
o
.
S
o
u
r
c
e
Y
R
M
O
D
T
H
R
M
N
S
e
c
.
L
a
t
.
L
o
n
g
.
M
s
M
b
M
w
D
e
p
t
h
(
k
m
)
1
I
1
5
0
1
9
2
4
3
4
.
0
0
7
5
.
0
0
6
.
4
2
I
M
D
1
5
5
2
+
3
4
.
0
0
7
4
.
5
0
7
.
5
3
A
1
5
5
5
+
9
2
2
0
3
3
.
5
0
7
5
.
5
0
7
.
6
4
Q
J
1
6
6
9
6
2
2
3
4
.
0
0
7
6
.
0
0
6
.
0
6
.
1
5
I
M
D
1
6
6
9
6
2
3
3
3
.
9
0
7
2
.
3
0
6
.
5
6
.
4
6
I
M
D
1
8
2
7
9
2
4
3
1
.
6
0
7
4
.
4
0
6
.
0
6
.
1
7
I
M
D
1
8
2
8
6
2
6
3
4
.
0
0
7
4
.
0
0
6
.
5
6
.
4
8
I
M
D
1
8
5
2
1
2
4
3
4
.
0
0
7
3
.
0
0
6
.
0
6
.
1
9
I
M
D
1
8
5
6
4
7
3
1
.
3
3
7
7
.
5
0
5
.
0
5
.
3
1
0
I
M
D
1
8
6
9
1
2
2
0
3
3
.
3
6
7
3
.
0
4
5
.
0
5
.
3
1
1
I
M
D
1
8
7
1
5
2
2
3
5
.
9
0
7
4
.
3
0
6
.
0
6
.
1
1
2
I
M
D
1
8
7
5
1
2
1
2
3
1
.
6
0
7
4
.
4
0
5
.
5
5
.
7
1
3
A
1
8
7
8
3
2
1
2
3
0
3
4
.
0
0
7
3
.
2
0
6
.
7
1
4
A
1
8
8
5
5
2
9
2
4
5
3
4
.
1
0
7
4
.
6
0
6
.
4
1
5
A
1
9
0
5
4
4
0
5
0
3
3
.
0
0
7
6
.
0
0
7
.
8
5
0
1
6
A
1
9
0
6
2
2
7
1
9
4
0
3
1
.
5
0
7
7
.
5
0
6
.
4
1
7
I
S
S
1
9
1
4
1
0
9
2
3
9
1
6
.
8
0
3
2
.
8
5
7
5
.
8
6
6
.
1
6
.
1
3
3
1
8
I
S
S
1
9
1
6
6
2
1
1
9
5
6
9
.
0
0
3
4
.
5
0
7
7
.
0
0
5
.
6
5
.
8
3
3
1
9
I
M
D
1
9
1
7
5
1
7
2
1
4
5
5
0
.
0
0
3
4
.
2
0
7
7
.
5
0
6
.
0
6
.
1
2
0
I
M
D
1
9
2
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
8
4
5
.
0
0
3
4
.
2
0
7
7
.
5
0
5
.
5
5
.
7
2
1
I
M
D
1
9
2
3
9
3
0
2
3
1
0
1
5
.
0
0
3
5
.
5
0
7
7
.
0
0
5
.
5
5
.
7
2
2
I
S
S
1
9
2
8
1
1
1
4
4
3
3
5
.
4
0
3
4
.
8
3
7
2
.
5
0
6
.
0
6
.
1
5
0
2
3
I
S
S
1
9
2
9
9
2
4
1
3
5
2
1
4
.
0
0
3
5
.
6
4
7
4
.
4
8
3
3
2
4
I
S
S
1
9
3
7
1
1
7
1
9
7
4
6
.
0
0
3
4
.
7
7
7
3
.
0
7
5
.
3
5
.
6
3
5
2
5
I
S
S
1
9
4
1
1
1
0
7
3
8
1
5
.
8
0
3
4
.
2
7
7
7
.
9
6
3
3
2
6
I
S
S
1
9
4
5
6
2
2
1
8
0
5
5
.
4
0
3
2
.
7
8
7
6
.
1
3
6
.
5
6
.
4
3
3
2
7
I
S
S
1
9
4
7
7
1
0
1
0
1
9
2
4
.
7
0
3
2
.
8
3
7
6
.
1
4
6
.
0
6
.
1
3
3
2
8
I
S
S
1
9
4
9
8
1
7
3
9
5
2
.
3
0
3
5
.
3
4
7
4
.
5
8
5
.
2
5
.
5
4
9
2
9
I
S
S
1
9
5
0
8
1
2
3
5
9
1
7
.
5
0
3
3
.
2
0
7
5
.
8
2
5
.
5
5
.
7
6
2
3
0
I
S
S
1
9
5
0
9
1
2
6
1
6
9
.
6
0
3
5
.
7
5
7
3
.
3
0
5
8
(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
Seismic hazard assessment of Kashmir and Kangra valley region 3
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

T
a
b
l
e
1
.
(
C
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
.
N
o
.
S
o
u
r
c
e
Y
R
M
O
D
T
H
R
M
N
S
e
c
.
L
a
t
.
L
o
n
g
.
M
s
M
b
M
w
D
e
p
t
h
(
k
m
)
3
1
I
S
S
1
9
5
0
9
2
5
1
7
5
8
3
.
3
0
3
2
.
6
4
7
6
.
7
1
8
1
3
2
I
S
S
1
9
5
0
1
0
6
2
1
2
0
4
4
.
4
0
3
2
.
1
7
7
7
.
0
2
3
3
I
S
S
1
9
5
1
9
1
2
2
0
4
1
4
6
.
7
0
3
2
.
7
8
7
5
.
8
9
5
.
5
5
.
7
2
3
4
I
S
S
1
9
5
1
9
1
5
0
5
6
1
5
.
0
0
3
2
.
8
4
7
6
.
2
3
3
3
3
5
I
S
S
1
9
5
2
1
2
2
7
1
8
4
5
4
0
.
2
0
3
1
.
0
7
7
4
.
7
5
5
.
5
5
.
7
3
3
3
6
I
S
S
1
9
5
3
5
1
2
1
1
8
1
5
.
7
0
3
3
.
5
4
7
2
.
6
7
5
.
5
5
.
7
3
9
3
7
B
C
I
1
9
5
5
3
1
0
2
1
1
6
2
4
.
2
0
3
3
.
1
4
7
7
.
0
6
1
2
3
8
I
S
S
1
9
5
5
3
1
2
1
6
4
2
2
3
.
1
0
3
4
.
6
0
7
3
.
2
0
5
.
5
5
.
7
5
1
3
9
B
C
I
1
9
5
5
4
1
4
1
0
4
9
.
0
0
3
2
.
2
5
7
6
.
4
9
5
.
3
5
.
5
3
3
4
0
I
S
S
1
9
6
0
2
4
1
0
2
0
4
1
.
9
0
3
5
.
5
9
7
7
.
3
7
5
7
4
1
B
C
I
1
9
6
1
3
2
0
1
4
0
3
0
.
9
0
3
5
.
6
0
7
7
.
5
6
6
6
4
2
B
C
I
1
9
6
1
6
4
2
3
3
5
3
2
.
2
0
3
3
.
2
6
7
5
.
2
8
5
1
4
3
B
C
I
1
9
6
1
6
9
3
5
5
4
6
.
5
0
3
4
.
6
1
7
4
.
1
1
4
4
4
4
B
C
I
1
9
6
1
8
8
1
8
5
3
2
0
.
2
0
3
4
.
1
8
7
4
.
4
6
3
3
4
5
B
C
I
1
9
6
1
1
1
2
8
1
0
1
4
4
4
.
7
0
3
5
.
6
1
7
3
.
0
5
4
4
6
B
C
I
1
9
6
2
5
8
1
9
3
8
2
9
.
2
0
3
3
.
5
8
7
2
.
4
9
4
.
5
5
.
0
5
1
4
7
E
H
B
1
9
6
2
6
1
7
4
3
9
3
2
.
5
3
3
3
.
2
3
7
5
.
8
9
5
.
2
5
.
5
3
5
4
8
I
S
S
1
9
6
2
8
2
1
5
3
2
2
3
.
0
0
3
3
.
5
2
7
3
.
3
7
4
.
5
5
.
0
4
6
4
9
I
M
D
1
9
6
2
9
1
5
1
2
3
5
8
.
0
0
3
1
.
9
0
7
6
.
2
0
5
.
5
5
.
7
5
0
Q
U
E
1
9
6
3
3
6
8
3
5
0
.
5
0
3
4
.
0
0
7
2
.
5
0
4
.
3
4
.
9
5
1
M
O
S
1
9
6
3
5
2
3
1
7
1
3
1
2
.
0
0
3
2
.
8
0
7
6
.
0
0
4
.
5
5
.
0
5
2
E
H
B
1
9
6
3
9
2
1
3
4
3
1
.
5
7
3
3
.
8
9
7
4
.
7
6
5
.
1
5
.
5
2
5
5
3
C
G
S
1
9
6
3
9
9
2
1
4
1
4
3
.
6
0
3
1
.
3
0
7
2
.
1
0
4
.
7
5
.
0
3
3
I
:
I
y
e
n
g
a
r
e
t
a
l
.
1
9
9
9
,
p
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
a
s
s
i
g
n
e
d
f
r
o
m
d
e
s
c
r
i
p
t
i
o
n
;
A
:
A
m
b
r
a
s
e
y
s
a
n
d
D
o
u
g
l
a
s
2
0
0
4
;
Q
J
:
Q
u
i
t
t
m
e
y
e
r
a
n
d
J
a
c
o
b
1
9
7
9
;
M
s
:
S
u
r
f
a
c
e
w
a
v
e
M
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e
;
M
b
:
B
o
d
y
w
a
v
e
M
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e
;
M
w
:
M
o
m
e
n
t
M
a
g
n
i
t
u
d
e
;
+
p
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
d
u
p
l
i
c
a
t
e
.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

others) and most recently 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake (Mw 7.6) within the Indo-
Kohistan Seismic Zone (IKSZ; coined by Seeber et al. 1981) (gure 1). Though
many large earthquakes with probable overlapping ruptures have occurred in this
belt (see gure 1; Bilham 2004; Avouac et al. 2006), they have not entirely released
the cumulative strain retained in the plate margin, accumulated by the ~3 cm/year
convergence of Indian Plate (Bettinelli et al. 2006). Thus, the belt is amenable to seis-
mic rupture through large earthquakes that may create extreme damage to both life
and property in the densely populated regions of the Kashmir and Kangra valley.
Possibility for the occurrence of such large earthquakes (M > 8.0) has already been
predicted from moment and geographical positioning system data analysis (see
Bilham & Ambraseys 2005; Bilham & Wallace 2005; Feldl & Bilham 2006) and
spatio-temporal seismic cluster analysis (Mukhopadhyay et al. 2011a).
To assess the seismic potentiality of Western Himalaya, we have adopted a threefold
analytical procedure in the present study. First, the description and damage scenarios
of the larger historical earthquakes occurring since 1500 AD have been documented
from ancient and modern literatures. Second, seismotectonics of those zones producing
the historical earthquakes and recent seismicity are analysed with contemporary
earthquake, centroid moment tensor (CMT) data and corresponding seismo-geological
sections (gures 2, 3(a) and 3(b)). Through b-value analysis, an attempt has been made
to identify the precursory trend in those zones, and nally, the quantication of size of
seismic hazard with return period is done through Gumbels extreme value statistics.
To achieve the goal stated above, we have carried out the following step-by-step
exercises: (i) preparation of complete list of earthquakes for the study area from 1501 to
1963 (presented with this paper) and from 1964 to 2010 with homogenized magnitude
Mw; (ii) documentation from historical accounts (sixteenthnineteenth centuries) for
large earthquakes with analytical review of seismic hazards; (iii) evaluation of contem-
porary seismotectonics in the region constrained by double couple CMT solutions;
(iv) analysis of precursory spatio-temporal b-values in the entire study area and changes
in temporal b-value around the epicentral tract of 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake and
1905 Kangra earthquake; and nally (v) estimate probable magnitude of future earth-
quake through of Gumbels extreme value statistics.
2. Earthquake data
Earthquake catalogues prepared for the area (latitudes 30
N36
N and longitudes
72
E78
E) have been presented in two maps (gures 2 and 3(a)) for two different
time periods superimposed on the tectonic elements (after Dasgupta et al. 2000). A
total of 53 earthquakes (table 1) for the period from AD 1501 to 1963 (historic, pre-
instrumental and instrumental period, prior to the establishment of WWSSN) are
plotted in the former, while 2176 events representing the entire instrumental period
from 1964 to 2010 are depicted in the latter map. All available published documents
and catalogues for earthquakes from the area were consulted in nalizing the list of
earthquakes. Valuable source of information on earthquakes particularly for the
period prior to AD1900 are from Baird-Smith (1843), Oldham (1882), Chandra
(1978), Quittmeyer and Jacob (1979), Iyengar et al. (1999), Ambraseys and Jackson
(2003), Ambraseys and Douglas (2004) and Bilham et al. (2010) along with the earth-
quake catalogue compiled by India Meteorological Department (IMD). For the
period from 1900 to 1963, earthquake data listed by USGS and ISC rectangular
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

Figure 2. Seismo-tectonic map of Western Himalaya in and around the Western Syntaxis
with historical earthquake data 15011963 (see table 1). The number is given as per No. of
table 1 and discussed in the text. Tectonic domains, earthquake with magnitude variation and
tectonic planes are shown. MBT: Main Boundary Thrust; MCT: Main Central Thrust; ISZ:
IndusTsangpo Suture Zone; MMT: Main Mantle Thrust; SS: Shyok Suture; KF: Karakoram
Fault; SF: Shinkiari Fault; AT: Attock Fault; JF: Jhelum Fault; ATF: Altyn Tagh Fault; MF:
Mangla Fault; SuF: Sundernagar Fault; JT: Jwalamukhi Thrust; DT: Drang Thrust; VT:
Vaikrita Thrust; KiF: Kishtwar Fault; RF: Ropar Fault; MDF: Mahendragarh Dehradun
Fault; MFT: Main Frontal Thrust; KB: Kashmir basin; PB: Peshwar Basin.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

Figure 3(a). Seismo-tectonic map of Western Himalaya in and around the Western Syntaxis
with earthquake data 19642010 and symbology as per magnitude and depth. Note ve earth-
quake cluster zones (AE): Kohistan arc (A); KashmirHazara syntaxis (B); NangaParbat
(Western Syntaxis) (C); Karakoram (D) and Himachal Himalaya (E). Tectonic domains,
earthquake with magnitude variation and tectonic planes are shown. MBT: Main Boundary
Thrust; MCT: Main Central Thrust; ISZ: IndusTsangpo Suture Zone; MMT: Main Mantle
Thrust; SS: Shyok Suture; KF: Karakoram Fault; SF: Shinkiari Fault; AT: Attock Fault; JF:
Jhelum Fault; ATF: Altyn Tagh Fault; MF: Mangla Fault; SuF: Sundernagar Fault; JT:
Jwalamukhi Thrust; DT: Drang Thrust; VT: Vaikrita Thrust; KiF: Kishtwar Fault; RF:
Ropar Fault; MDF: Mahendragarh Dehradun Fault; MFT: Main Frontal Thrust.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

search were primarily consulted. For the period from 1964 to May 2009, ISC param-
eters are exclusively considered and for remaining period up to December 2010
NEIC (USGS) data were incorporated in the present catalogue. The Centennial
Catalogue and EHB event data [E. R. Engdahl (personal communication)] is also
consulted for cross checking of earthquake parameters. Earthquake magnitudes
given by different agencies and also for different periods are of different scales such
as M
L
, M
S
, m
b
, etc. For any analysis on seismotectonics or earthquake statistics, it
is necessary to convert the different magnitude scales to a uniform scale and accord-
ingly relations among magnitude scales as given by Gutenberg and Richter (1956),
Hanks and Kanamori (1979) and Scordilis (2006) were utilized to derive a uniform
magnitude Mw (Moment magnitude) for all earthquakes in the catalogue.
The data catalogue from the year 1964 to 2010 contains 2176 events with magni-
tude ranging from Mw 3.6 to 7.6. To workout the magnitude completeness, we adopt
the methodology based on the assumption of self-similarity (Wiemer & Wyss 2000).
A fast and reliable estimate of the magnitude completeness (Mc) by this method is to
dene the point of the maximum curvature (MAX
C
) as point of magnitude of
completeness. This is adopted to compute the maximum value of the rst derivative
of the frequencymagnitude curve. In practice, this matches the magnitude bin with
the highest frequency of events in the non-cumulative frequencymagnitude distribu-
tion. The highest frequency of events in the non-cumulative curve has a peak with
magnitude 4.0 as the highest frequency class and that by denition is taken as Mc
(gure 4). Thus, the catalogue is, by and large, complete above this cut-off magnitude
(Mw _ 4).
Figure 3(b). Seismo-geological sections across Western Himalaya (modied after gure 5 of
Mukhopadhyay et al. 2011b) where subducting Indian Plate and overriding Eurasian plate in
the sections have resulted into generation of imbricate structure. Position of section lines is
marked in gure 3(a). Note the low dipping Indian Plate in Kashmir-Hazara and Kohistan arc
sector in section AA
/
. Thickening of Indian Plate in sections BB
/
and CC
/
along Naga Par-
bat is noteworthy. The imbrications are again relevant in Himachal HimalayaKarakoram
sector along section DD
/
. The important beach ball diagrams are placed in the section to
understand the tectonic variations across arc. For reference of CMT solution, please refer to
table 2 with number given in the sections. NP Nanga-Parbat.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

3. Large earthquakes in and around Kashmir and Kangra Valley historical through
present
According to Lawrence (1895, p. 212213), 11 great earthquakes have occurred in
and around Kashmir valley since the fteenth century AD. In the nineteenth century
itself there have been four severe earthquakes and it is noteworthy that in the last
two, of 1864 and 1885, the most violent shocks were felt in an elliptical area whose
focuses were at Srinagar and Baramula. Regarding the other two earthquakes of the
nineteenth century, Lawrence states In 1827 there was a severe earthquake (this
must be the event of 1828; see below) and the city was almost destroyed, and also
refers to the earthquake of 30 June 1857, the day Maharaja Gulab Singh (the rst of
the Dogra rulers) expired. In addition to these historical records, some of which are
discussed below, earthquakes that dates back 500 and 2200 yr. B. P. along the
Muzaffarabad fault strand have also been identied (Kondo et al. 2008). Relevant
portions (from rare and out of print books) of descriptive accounts for pre-1900
earthquakes are retained as in original and given in smaller fonts.
Figure 3(c). Isoseismal map of 8 October 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake, Mw 7.6 (after
Pande et al. 2006). Green line indicates surface rupture.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

3.1. 24 September AD 1501 (No. 1; table 1; gure 2)
This earthquake is mentioned only by Iyengar et al. (1999). Quoting Tarikh-e-
Hasan (Pir Hasan Shah) it is stated that during the reign of Sultan Fatteh Shah (in
Kashmir from A.H. 902 to 911 corresponding to AD 14961505; see Prinsep, 1836) on
12th of Asvach Pasi of 907 H (24 September 1501 AD):
A severe earthquake occurred in the previous night. A large number of creatures of God
lost their lives and houses were raised to ground. The earth and the sky remained in
tumult for a period of three months after which normalcy was restored.
3.2. AD 1552 (No. 2, table 1, gure 2)
Possibly the rst reference for this earthquake is in Prinseps (1836) table where he
mentioned of an earthquake in Kashmir during the period of King Ibrahim II (set up
by Daulet Chakk) in A.H. 960, corresponding to AD 1552. Prinseps source of
information is possibly those from Persian documents which have also been men-
tioned by Iyengar et al. (1999) while discussing the AD 1555 earthquake, though in
all such documents (Haider Malik Chadura Rasul Mulik in Tarikh-e Kashmir;
Narayan Kaul Ajiz in Tarikh-e Kashmir; Khwaja Muhammad Azam Deedamari in
Waqiat-e Kashmir and Pir Hasan Shah in Tarikh-e Hasan) the year is mentioned
as A.H. 960 which is AD 1552 (and not 1553 as given by Iyengar et al. 1999) and
later on referred by researchers (Baird-Smith 1843; Chandra 1978; Quittmeyer &
Jacob 1979; Oldham 1882). It may be noted that these documents do not refer to any
earthquake from the Kashmir valley that occurred in 1555 AD. IMD catalogue also
lists this earthquake and assigns a location 34.00N: 74.50E with a high magnitude of
7.5. The present authors are of the opinion that this 1552 earthquake and the next
one in table 1 i.e. the 1555 earthquake (which has received more acceptances in the
Figure 4. Frequencymagnitude distribution of the data (19642010) in the catalogue used.
The result of the MAXC approach (Wiemer and Wyss 2000) is indicated with the arrow as
magnitude completeness (Mc = 4.0).
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

contemporary literature) are the same events, though all available details are
described under the AD 1555 earthquake.
3.3. September AD 1555 (No. 3, table 1, gure 2)
This earthquake has been discussed by Iyengar et al. (1999) quoting from the transla-
tion by Dutt (1887) of Shukas Rajatarangini. The version of Dutt (1887) is as follows:
In the month of Asvina of the year 30, there occurred frequently earthquakes on account
of the wicked acts of the king, as if the earth suffered from atulence. The planet which
causes calamity is assuaged by various acts, by gifts of land to independent people, by
giving back to men their properties, which had been robbed, and by like deeds. Now
there occurred an earthquake at the second watch of night when all men were asleep,
and it destroyed many people. It caused holes in the ground, and travellers going on
their way misled at every step. Houses fell into these holes at night and people, anxious
to get out from their houses in the morning, issued by breaking through the roof. On
this occasion wooden houses fell into the water of Vitasta, and when they had oated
down for seven kroshas, the people who were in them awoke and came out.
The confusion caused by the earthquake in towns of Hassanpura and Hosainapura, situ-
ated at some distance across the river, can be seen even to this day. Pitiable cries of lamenta-
tion of the much aficted people were then heard calling out O father! O mother! O friend!
O brother! in different places, which made the heart feel as if it were struck by a thunder-
bolt. At this time the sky appeared terrible with claps of thunder, the movements of the
stars were stopped, and the land was agitated like a gourd on the waves. The mind of the
people became troubled with fear of the earthquake, and they felt no affection for sons or
friends or wives or for good men or for kind hearted people or for any object whatever. It
is owing to the glory of the holy shrines of Vijayeshvara, Marttanda and Varahakshetra
that fears and apprehensions from earthquake were not felt by the inhabitants of these pla-
ces. The earthquake continued for several days, occurring several times every day, and all
the people lived under canvas. When some time had elapsed, and all men had returned to
their home, Dauluta Chakkaka governed the whole country with a strong hand. . .
Iyengar et al. (1999) add that the year 30 is Laukik year used in Rajatarangini and
the month Ashwin corresponds to September; the year is 1555. They further con-
cluded from the description of Shuka that at Vijayeshvara, Marttanda (located 5 km
east of Anantnag) and Varahakshetra (Varahmula or present day Baramula) were
less affected; this might not be the right interpretation as the statement in the original
document only indicated that fears and apprehension were less to the inhabitants
who were condent by virtue of being close to the holy shrines. As per the Persian
documents when the site Bijbehara (33.79N: 75.10E) was so much affected, at least
the sites like Marttanda [5 km east to Anantnag (33.73N: 75.16E)] might have also
been largely affected. Another point of worth noticing is that Daulata Chakkaka
ruled Kashmir during 1552 (see Prinsep 1836).
Iyengar et al. (1999) also quote from two other Persian accounts (Tabaqat-e
Akbari, II and Tarikh-e Ferishta, II) describing the earthquake; both of these refer
to the year as 962H, when there was a great earthquake in Kashmir and many
villages and towns were destroyed. The villages of Jalu (or Nilu) and Dampur (or
Adampur) with their buildings and trees were shifted from one bank of Bihat
(Jhelum) to the opposite bank; about 600 people perished in the village of Mardar
(or Marwar or Marvardan), situated at the foot of a hill, owing to a landslip. To our
opinion the reference of Adampur must be Awantipur.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

As mentioned above under the 1552 earthquake, four Persian documents describe
the event to have occurred during 960H. Quoting Tarikh-e Kashmir records by
Haider Malik, Iyengar et al. (1999) notes that during the reign of Habib Shah in the
year 960H an extraordinary and unique earthquake occurred. It brought to mind the
memory of Dooms Day. Of the many uncommon occurrences due to this earth-
quake are: sinking of many houses under the ground. . .; on all sides ruins and debris
of houses were visible due to the shock of earthquake. . .; two hamlets, Hasanpur and
Husainpur, located on the opposite side of the river, within village Bilarah (Bijbehra),
near the pass Nandmarg shifted sites, respectively, across the river at midnight, etc.
The other three Persian documents referred by Iyengar et al. (1999), all mentions
about the shifting of the two villages across Vaisho (Vesav, Vesha, Vasav, ancient
Visoka; a tributary of Jhelum) and not across Vitasta (River Jhelum, a tributary of
Chenab) as was originally mentioned in Rajtarangini. Other important observation/
information includes this is the fourth incident of earthquake in the Kashmir valley,
during the period of Ismail Shah (in 960H) (Tarikh-e Hasan) [Ismail Shah was the
ruler in 963H corresponding to AD 1555 (Prinsep 1836)]; the catastrophic cycle
remained for a week but took two months for restoration of normalcy; some earlier
springs disappeared and some new springs gushed out from the ground; wide cracks
appeared at many places on earth, etc.
From the discussion above it emerges that even the original documents refer to
both the years AD 1552 and AD 1555, though strongly vouches for the former (see
also Newall 1854, p. 424). However as the descriptive accounts refer to the same
epicentral tract, this is a single large earthquake similar to the size of the 2005
Muzaffarabad earthquake.
3.4. 22 June 1669 AD (No. 4, table 1, gure 2)
As per reports the earthquake of 22 June 1669 AD was only a moderate event that was
felt in the Kashmir valley. The epicentral parameters assigned by Chandra (1978) and
the IMD catalogue (35.00N:77.00E) being too far to be experienced from the Kashmir
valley, the location given by Quittmeyer and Jacob (1979) [34.00N:76.00E] is adopted.
On the other hand, the earthquake of 23 June AD 1669 (No. 5; table 1) was located far
to the west [Attock; 33.90N: 72.30E assigned by IMD, Chandra (1978) and Quittmeyer
and Jacob (1979)] to cause any sensational effect in the valley. Thus, the information
provided by Iyengar et al. (1999) quoting Persian documents for the 23rd event should
possibly be linked to the earthquake of 22 June.
3.5. 26 June 1828 AD (No. 7, table 1, gure 2)
All available published documents and also IMD catalogue report the 1828 AD
earthquake to have occurred on 6 June. However, following the detail account of
Vigne (1844) the date has been revised to 26 June (table 1; No. 7). According to
Lawrence (1895) that in the year 1827 there was a severe earthquake and the city
(Srinagar) was almost destroyed. The author was in all probability referring to the
1828 earthquake that devastated Srinagar. An account from Vigne (1844) states:
On the night of the 26th of June, 1828 at half-past ten, a very severe shock was felt, which
shook down a great many houses, and killed a great number of people: perhaps
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

1000 persons were killed, and 1200 houses shaken down; . . .The earth opened in several pla-
ces about the city; and fetid water, and rather warm, rose rapidly from the clefts, and then
subsided. . . .Huge rocks and stones came rattling down from the mountains. On that night
only one shock took place: but just before sunrise there was another, accompanied by a ter-
ric and lengthened explosion, louder than cannon. On that day there were twenty such
shocks, each with a similar explosion. The inhabitants were, of course, in the open country.
The river sometimes appeared to stand still, and then rushed forward. For the remaining
six days. . .and the whole of the two next months. . . there were never less than 100,
and sometimes 200 or more shocks in the day, all accompanied with an explosion . . .On
the sixth day, there was one very bad shock, and on the fteenth, at three oclock, was the
worst. . . At the end of the two months, the number decreased to ten or fteen in the twenty
four hours, and the noise became less, and the earthquakes gradually ceased. About this
time the cholera made its appearance. A census of the dead was taken at rst, but discontin-
ued when it was found that many thousands had died in twenty-one days.
3.6. 24 January AD 1852 (No. 8, table 1, gure 2):
Another signicant earthquake from the western part of the study area struck on
24 January AD 1852 (table 1; No. 8). A note on this earthquake was published by
Merewether (1853) that states:
On the morning of 2nd day of the Mussulman month Rubbee- ul Akbir (correspond-
ing to the 24th of January of our reckoning), at the time of the appearance of the false
dawn, that is about 4 oclock, a very severe shock of an earthquake was felt at Kahun,
the principal Fort in the Murree hills and residence of the chief and main portion of that
tribe; one side of the Fort wall was thrown down, the remainder much shattered,
and the greater number of the houses inside also overthrown, burying beneath the ruins
many men, women, and children, with some cattle, and a good deal of property
besides. . . At the same time that this disaster occurred at Kahun another even more fear-
ful calamity overtook a portion of the tribe, living with their cattle in a large cave, some
little distance to the Northward. The hill in which the cave was, was violently shaken,
and fell burying nearly every living being at the time within it. The road by Nuffoosk to
kahun has been completely closed by the hill falling, and lling up the pass through
which it formerly went. A considerable increase to the ow of water in the Lahree river
has taken place; so much so that water is now owing past where it never even came
before, excepting after heavy rain. According to the last accounts received, 260,
Mussalmen, women and children, have been killed, and upwards of eighty Hindoos,
with a large quantity of cattle; . . .The earthquake appears to have been felt throughout
Cutchee; at Gundava, Dadur, Bhagh, Lahree, Pooljee, Chuttur, at the same time as it
was at Khanghur, and at kahun about 4 o clock on the morning of the 24th ultimo.
3.7. 2 March AD 1878 (No. 13, table 1, gure 2)
Wynne (1878) described this earthquake as
On the 2nd of last March the most severe shock which has occurred within the memory
of the present generation, so far as I can learn, affected the whole of the northern part of
the province. With regard to it I have collected a few notes, which I offer more as a
record of the event than as an exhaustive or abstrusely scientic treatment of the subject.
Accurate details concerning so huge an area are not within the reach of every one to col-
lect, and I have had a little difculty in learning even so much as I have put together.
The earthquake was damaging at Abbottabad, Kohat, Peshawar, Attock and
Rawalpindi and strongly felt at Jhelum, Murree, Simla and Mussoorie.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

3.8. 30 May AD 1885 (No. 14, table 1, gure 2)
Descriptive account along with an isoseismal map for the earthquake of 30 May AD
1885 [table 1; No. 14] was published in the GSI Records (Jones 1885a, 1885b); Bashir
et al. (2009); estimated EMS (European Macroseismic Scale) intensity VIVII
(Bilham et al. 2010) and assigned M = 6.26.3 (Ambraseys & Douglas 2004; Szeliga
et al. 2010). According to Jones (1885a, 1885b):
In spite of the comparative mildness of the shock, the loss of life was very great, being in
round numbers about 3000. The cause of this is to be looked for in the very insecure
manner of building in vogue. In a very considerable number of the cases in which huts
were damaged, the supports of the roof had given way and allowed it to subside, fre-
quently carrying the walls down with it leaving only a mass of rubbish to indicate the
spot where the house had stood.
The greatest damage has been done over an irregularly elliptical area, the long axis of
which is 10 miles and the short axis 6 miles long, and the supercial area about 47 square
miles, and nearly symmetrically disposed about the seismic vertical. Within this area, the
destruction was complete, whole villages being almost entirely destroyed and many lives
lost. This corresponds to the meizoseismal (Intensity VII in MSK scale) area of
Mallet.
The area outside this, corresponding to Mallets rst isoseismal, includes the area within
which large portions of villages and towns were thrown down and persons killed. This is
included by a line passing east of Srinagar through Magaon south of Baramula and
across the Jhelam near Gingal, then passing north of Sopur and round again to the
south of Srinagar. It includes an area of about 500 sq miles.
Outside is again another area of about 3000 sq miles (second isoseismal) including those
places from which slight damage to buildings etc. is reported to have occurred, but it is
probable that even within this area there was some loss of life. It is indicated on the map
by the broken line passing north of Gurais to east of Titwal on the Kishengunga river,
west of Chikar, southeast of Bagh, and south of Punch, at or near all of which some
damage to buildings, chiey forts, is reported. From Punch to Gurais there are no
reports, and the true course of the line is uncertain.
Area under third isoseismal is large, including the places where the shock is
reported to have been perceived viz., Peshawar, Gilgit, Simla, Sabathu, Dalhousie,
Lahore etc.A large landslip occurred at Larri-dur, a place about 7 miles south of
Baramula. This village is situated upon a hill lying NW-SE, composed of slightly
hardened Karewa clays resting upon sandstones and dipping to NE at 5-10
. Above
the clay is surface soil of varying thickness. The upper 30 feet of clay and surface
soil has slipped along to the dip, exposing a fresh smooth surface of clay. The line
of parting ran along the length of the hill, and a ssure has been formed along this
line varying in width from 30 feet at the SE end to about 500 yards at the NW end
and with a length of about half a mile.
In many places, as at Patan, Dubgaon (at the junction of the Jhelam and Pohra rivers),
along the banks of the river at and above Baramula, numerous ssures were formed in
the alluvial soil and all running roughly parallel to river banks or else across the slope of
hills. In the neighbourhood of many of these ssures water and ne sand were thrown
out, and the villages stated that there was a strong sulphureous smell given off from the
sand for several days. In one case at Nila, near Patan, an inammable gas without odour
being slowly evolved. Several springs were affected by the earthquake, the ow of water
being increased for periods of time ranging from a few hours to as many as eight days.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

The country occupied by the meizoseismal area is entirely composed of recent alluvium,
and that within the rst isoseismal line is almost entirely of the same character, the
Karewa beds (Pleistocene alluvium) coming into the NW of the area in the neighbour-
hood of Baramula, and down the river below Baramula the alluvial deposits are under-
laid at short depth by the more indurated rocks of the Panjal system, which also appear
to the east of Srinagar.
3.9. 4 April 1905 (No. 15, table 1, gure 2)
The next important and the most damaging earthquake within the study area is
that of the 4 April 1905 Kangra earthquake that locates to the southeast of the
Kashmir valley. The details on this earthquake are available (GSI Records,
XXXII, Pt 4 1905), Middlemiss (1910) and several other published documents.
Recent research articles (Ambraseys & Douglas 2004; Hough et al. 2005), among
others, added several unknown facts to our knowledge base. It may be noted that
about 20,000 human lives were lost due to this earthquake. There are two
separate epicentral locations of this earthquake: one with 33.00N: 76.00E, focal
depth 50 km (Centennial Catalogue by E. R. Engdahl and A. Villasenor 2002;
Ambraseys & Douglas 2004) and the other with 32.30N: 76.20E (IMD source).
For this paper, we adopted the epicentral location of former (see table 1) for its
wider acceptance.
According to Middlemiss (1910), the innermost isoseismal X [(R-F Scale) ~ IX
in MSK Scale)] encloses an area of about 200 sq miles. Its curve roughly cuts Dharm-
sala, Rehlu, Daulatpur, Bawarna and Palampur. It includes much of the Kangra val-
ley and portions of the lower slopes of the Dhauladhar range. The next isoseist IX
(~ VIIIX in MSK Scale) though less well dened encloses an elliptical area of about
1600 sq miles. On the west and south the isoseismal was located with considerable
accuracy passing through Shahpur, Ranital and Sujanpur; but further ESE by Mandi
and Manglaur it is less well dened. The isoseist VIII (~ VIIVIII in MSK Scale)
forms two separate close curves: one in the KangraKulu area and the other, a
smaller one, in the DehradunMussoorie area. The former forms an elliptical area of
about 2150 sq miles including localities Telokenath, Jawalamukhi, Suket, Rampur,
Manikaran, Kot, etc.
3.10. 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake (gure 3(a))
After 100 years of the Kangra earthquake of 1905, a devastating earthquake of
Mw 7.6 had occurred in the Kashmir Himalaya (Jhelum re-entrant) on the morning
of 8 October 2005. The tremors were felt in a radius of over 1000 km with damage
taking place in an area of 36,000 sq km. The meizoseismal zone was located in
Pakistan and in the Kunhar and Neelam (Kishanganga) valleys of Kashmir where
the death and destruction was unprecedented. On the Indian side, heavy damage was
restricted to Uri Tehsil of Baramula District and Karna (Tangdhar) Tehsil of
Kupwara District.
The isoseismal map (gure 3(c); after Pande et al. 2006) with surface rupture,
an important document for engineering design purpose, has been prepared incor-
porating the eld data collected by GSI team from the Indian side and data from
authoritative sources in Pakistan. The epicentral tract of the earthquake experi-
enced an intensity of X on MSK-64 scale. This zone encompassed Balakot town
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

and Muzaffarabad city. In this and adjoining sectors, the event generated a very
large number of landslides that showed concentration along a 65-km long belt
trending in N35
WS35
E direction and extending between Balakot and Bagh. In

this segment, coseismic rupturing of Muzaffarabad and Tanda faults was
observed. The Uri Tehsil experienced an intensity of IX, whereas Srinagar was
subjected to intensity VII.
Furthermore, the earthquake triggered several thousand landslides, with roads
closer to epicentral area in the mountainous region suffered extensive landslides
(Rai & Murty, 2006). Analysis using high-resolution images from the Space
Imaging, Inc. IKONOS satellite showed that landslides occurred along the active
faults and were concentrated on the northeastern side (Fujiwara et al. 2006). The
landslides were mainly rock falls and debris falls, although translational rock and
debris slides also occurred (Owen et al. 2008). The failures were associated with
six geomorphicgeologicanthropogenic settings: (i) highly fractured carbonate
rocks comprising the lowest beds in the hanging wall of the likely earthquake
fault; (ii) Tertiary siliciclastic rocks along antecedent drainages that traverse the
HazaraKashmir Syntaxis; (iii) steep (N50
) slopes comprising Precambrian and

lower paleozoic rocks; (iv) very steep (>>50
) lower slopes of uvially undercut

Quaternary valley lls; and (v) ridges and spur crests (Owen et al. 2008). A fur-
ther study (Kamp et al. 2008) using imagery and GIS supports the earlier views
that (i) earthquake-triggered landslides are concentrated in specic zones associ-
ated with event-controlling parameters; and (ii) in the Western Himalaya defores-
tation and road construction contributed signicantly to landsliding during and
shortly after earthquakes.
4. Seismotectonic evaluation
The damage scenarios and analytical review of seismic hazards of the larger his-
torical earthquakes occurring in the Western Himalaya have been described in
the earlier section. However, these earthquake events and accompanying hazards
are not isolated but products of ongoing tectonism that occurred within the seis-
motectonics domains whose tectonic elucidation will be carried out in the follow-
ing section with contemporary earthquake and CMT fault plane solution data.
For this purpose, the earthquake epicentre plots (Mw _ 4.0 within time domain
19642010) on tectonic elements (after Dasgupta et al. 2000) are carried out
(gure 3(a)). The plot and our previous analysis (Mukhopadhyay et al. 2011a,
2011b) have brought out ve distinct seismotectonics zones (AE of gure 3(a))
where earthquake dominantly clusters from west to east, they are Kohistan
arc (A); KashmirHazara Syntaxis (B); Nanga-Parbat (Western Syntaxis) (C);
Karakoram (D) and Himachal Himalaya (E). Further evaluation is carried out
through seismo-geological cross sections; which are drawn with earthquake EHB
relocated parameters, topography and surface geology to understand the plate
conguration in conjunction to the known seismo-tectonic model of the Hima-
laya. The earthquake data cross checked with EHB-relocated parameters are
extracted to draw four seismo-geological sections (AA
/
, B B
/
, CC
/
and DD
/
)
across the clusters (AE) which are further endowed with some well-constrained
fault plane solutions with beach ball diagrams to illustrate the stress regime across
the arc (gure 3(b)).
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

4.1. Kohistan arc (Zone A of gure 3(a))
The Kohistan arc with rocks of Mesozoic Island arc system encompasses the
Kohistan arc tectonic block, an extension of PamirHindukush seismic belt. Pegler
and Das (1998) have determined the shape of the seismic zone in PamirHindukush
region (30
42
N; 68
78
E) with relocated hypocentral data and pointed out that

the seismic zone under the Hindukush follows the classical pattern of subducting
slab controlled by gravity, whereas Pamir region indicates slab deformed due to ow
of upper mantle. The intermediate focus (4170 km) and shallow focus
(040 km) seismicity are common in the Kohistan arc cluster lies on the top of
Kohistan/Ladakh plutonic complex (magmatic arc). This zone has generated low to
moderate seismicity with only one major earthquake in 22.5.1871 (Ms 6.0) near
Gilgit (No. 11 of table 1; gure 2) in historic past. Seismic activity is related to
northsouth vergence of Indian and Asian plates. Our previous study (see gure 5(a)
of Mukhopadhyay et al. 2011b) has also indicated activation of an out-of-sequence
(?) thrust west of Gilgit in this segment that is producing the bulk of present seismic-
ity. Moderate slips recorded by the earthquake in this sector are up dip along the
rupture plane and controlled by thrust movement.
4.2. KashmirHazara Syntaxis (Zone B of gure 3(a))
The seismotectonic characteristics and huge damage potentiality of this zone are nar-
rated in details in our earlier publications with estimation of Maximum Capable
Figure 5. (a) DEM with Tectonic planes and locations of CMT solutions (70 numbers of
table 2). No. of table 2 is placed as number. The blow-up version with locations of CMT data
(b) KashmirHazara Systaxis with mainly aftershocks of 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake and
(c) part of Nanga-Parbat Syntaxis.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

Earthquake (MCE) of Mw 8.0 earthquake (Mukhopadhyay et al. 2011a, 2011b).
Historical large earthquakes of 24 September 1501, 1552, 26 June 1828, 24 January
1852, 2 March 1878, 30 May 1885 (Nos. 1, 2, 7, 8, 13, 14 of table 1; gure 2) and
most recently 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake have occurred in this zone and
adjoining Kashmir valley. The occurrence of these large earthquakes and future pre-
dictions naturally elevated the seismic hazard scenario. The seismo-geological section
drawn through the KashmirHazara in our previous study (see gure 5(a) of
Mukhopadhyay et al. 2011b) has brought out subducted Indian Plate beneath the
Eurasian Plate and accretionary Himalayan, Kohistan and Karakoram arc litho-
packages overriding it. The seismic section shows seismicity from two depth bands,
shallow focus (<30 km) and also from moderate depth (5070 km) (gure 5(a);
Mukhopadhyay et al. 2011a). Along this zone and south of it, among the major neo-
tectonic faults, the Jhelum fault (JF) is regionally most extensive wrench fault that
shows left lateral strike-slip motion; its conjugate set is Mangla Fault (MF) with
right lateral strike-slip motion. The seismically active Shinkiari Fault in the syntaxis
is parallel to JF and Attock fault (AF) is parallel to the Himalayan trend.
Earthquakes in this zone have nucleated mostly along Main Boundary Thrust
(MBT) and recent reactivation of Muzaffarabad and Tanda faults. MBT shows both
thrust and oblique slip movements. CMT solutions indicate high angle tension along
NWSE direction and low angle compression along NESW direction (table 2;
gures 5(a), 5(b) and 6). Fault plane solutions also indicate major thrusting along a
NWSE fault plane dipping moderately towards NE (gures 5(a), 5(b) and 6). In
Kashmir valley towards east and Peshawar basin in the west, the earthquakes show
thrust mechanism. The historical earthquakes (Nos. 1, 2, 7, 14 and 52 of table 1;
gure 2) with epicentre in Kashmir valley are related to MBT. Similarly, most
recently, the 2 September 1963 Bagdam earthquake (33.9N : 74.7E) which damaged
over 2000 houses and 28 December 1974 Pathan earthquake which affected 60,000
population in the area of Swat and Indus Kohistan are of importance. The earth-
quakes in the Peshwar basin (Nos. 5, 8, 13 of table 1 and gure 2) have nuances with
activated Attock Thrust.
The Muzaffarabad earthquake (Mw 7.6 of October 2005; plot no. 23 of gures 5(a)
and 6) and its aftershocks form a NWSE elliptical cloud (see Mahajan et al. 2006)
with isoseismal lines oriented in the same direction (gure 3(c); Pande et al. 2006)
indicating a close faultthrust interaction between Muzaffarabad fault, Tanda Fault
and splays of MBT. Muzaffarabad earthquake occurred in IndusKohistan seismic
zone (gure 1) accompanied by a rupture length of more than 75 km (gure 3(c))
that cut across the KashmirHazara syntaxis and reactivating the Muzaffarabad and
Tanda faults (Avouac et al. 2006). North of Muzaffarabad the surface rupture coin-
cides approximately with the MBT, on the southwestern ank of the syntaxis,
although the two faults have opposite dip angles (Avouac et al. 2006). Towards
north, the rupture abruptly terminates at the hairpin turn of MBT suggesting struc-
tural control. The fault offset is 4 m on average and peaks to 7 m northwest of
Muzaffarabad (Avouac et al. 2006) with a net-slip of 5.4 m along the fault strand
(Kondo et al. 2008). Focal depths of the aftershocks indicate that the seismic activity
is conned to a narrow depth zone between 5 and 10 km. The distribution of earth-
quake in this zone is indicative of extension of IndusKohistan seismic zone in the
KashmirHazara syntaxial area and activation of more than one fault (Monalisa
2009). The Coulomb stress mapping indicates increase of stress in the northwest
of the rupture along the trend of IndusKohistan seismic zone (Parsons et al. 2006).
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

T
a
b
l
e
2
.
C
M
T
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
s
(
s
o
u
r
c
e
:
h
t
t
p
:
/
/
w
w
w
.
s
e
i
s
m
o
l
o
g
y
.
h
a
r
v
a
r
d
.
e
d
u
)
f
o
r
7
0
e
a
r
t
h
q
u
a
k
e
s
(
p
e
r
i
o
d
1
9
8
0
2
0
0
9
)
i
n
t
h
e
W
e
s
t
e
r
n
H
i
m
a
l
a
y
a
.
T
h
e
s
o
l
u
t
i
o
n
p
a
r
a
m
e
t
e
r
s
a
r
e
d
i
s
c
u
s
s
e
d
i
n
t
h
e
t
e
x
t
.
T
h
e
v
a
l
u
e
o
f
r
s
t
c
o
l
u
m
n
(
N
o
.
)
i
s
p
l
o
t
t
e
d
o
n
t
h
e
m
a
p
s
(
g
u
r
e
5
)
a
n
d
b
e
a
c
h
b
a
l
l
d
i
a
g
r
a
m
s
(
g
u
r
e
6
)
.
N
o
.
D
A
M
O
Y
R
H
R
M
N
S
E
C
L
a
t
.
L
o
n
g
.
D
e
p
t
h
M
w
P
l
a
n
e
1
A
z
i
m
u
t
h
P
l
a
n
e
1
D
i
p
P
l
a
n
e
1
R
a
k
e
P
l
a
n
e
2
A
z
i
m
u
t
h
P
l
a
n
e
2
D
i
p
P
l
a
n
e
2
R
a
k
e
P
a
x
i
s
A
z
i
m
u
t
h
P
a
x
i
s
D
i
p
T
a
x
i
s
A
z
i
m
u
t
h
T
a
x
i
s
D
i
p
N
a
x
i
s
D
i
p
N
a
x
i
s
A
z
i
m
u
t
h
1
2
3
8
1
9
8
0
2
1
3
6
5
5
3
3
7
5
.
8
1
5
5
.
5
2
9
3
1
0
6
3
1
4
0
8
1
9
5
2
2
6
3
6
5
6
5
4
5
3
1
9
2
2
3
8
1
9
8
0
2
1
5
0
5
.
7
3
3
7
5
.
8
1
5
5
.
5
2
9
8
1
2
8
2
1
2
6
7
8
9
2
2
1
4
3
3
3
8
5
7
2
3
0
5
3
1
2
9
1
9
8
1
7
1
5
5
8
3
6
7
3
.
6
1
0
6
.
1
1
0
7
3
6
7
9
3
0
0
5
4
9
8
2
5
9
2
4
0
7
9
6
1
1
6
4
2
2
2
1
9
8
2
1
7
5
9
5
8
3
6
7
3
.
8
1
5
5
.
2
1
2
3
4
3
7
6
3
2
2
4
8
1
0
3
4
3
2
2
9
9
8
0
1
0
1
3
3
5
2
6
4
1
9
8
6
7
3
5
2
0
3
2
7
6
.
4
1
5
5
.
5
2
9
9
1
9
5
8
1
5
3
7
4
1
0
0
2
3
5
2
8
7
7
6
0
1
0
3
3
0
6
1
6
7
1
9
8
6
2
2
3
1
2
3
0
7
8
.
2
1
5
5
.
4
2
7
8
1
7
3
7
1
5
2
8
0
1
0
4
2
3
1
3
3
7
9
5
3
1
4
3
3
0
7
2
4
1
1
9
9
2
5
4
5
3
3
6
7
4
.
6
1
0
3
5
.
4
2
6
8
8
6
0
3
5
8
9
0
1
7
6
2
2
3
3
1
3
3
3
8
6
3
8
8
4
1
9
9
3
3
4
9
3
4
3
6
7
7
.
6
1
5
5
.
2
2
6
9
7
3
1
4
4
7
7
1
6
3
2
2
7
2
1
1
3
6
2
6
8
4
0
9
1
5
6
1
9
9
3
2
3
1
2
2
3
3
6
7
7
.
8
1
5
5
9
5
7
4
1
3
1
8
8
7
8
1
6
3
5
2
2
0
3
2
1
3
6
9
2
2
4
1
0
1
4
1
9
9
6
8
8
6
.
5
3
1
7
3
.
5
9
1
.
7
5
.
2
9
8
3
3
1
0
1
2
6
5
5
8
8
3
0
1
2
1
5
3
7
6
6
2
6
9
1
1
1
9
6
2
0
0
0
2
2
4
1
5
0
3
5
7
7
.
5
4
0
.
4
5
.
4
1
7
9
7
7
1
7
9
8
9
8
9
1
3
4
3
1
0
1
3
4
8
7
7
2
6
4
1
2
1
6
7
2
0
0
1
1
6
7
1
9
3
3
7
3
.
1
8
5
.
2
5
.
1
6
5
3
6
4
9
2
9
2
6
4
1
1
6
4
1
5
2
4
3
6
2
2
3
1
0
0
1
3
2
8
9
2
0
0
1
4
3
7
5
9
3
3
7
5
.
8
4
0
.
5
4
.
9
3
2
3
3
2
1
0
5
1
2
5
5
9
8
1
2
2
2
1
4
1
0
7
4
8
1
3
0
1
4
2
7
1
2
0
0
2
2
2
3
3
4
3
3
3
7
6
2
8
.
8
5
.
2
2
2
5
2
0
1
1
3
2
5
8
6
1
1
0
2
1
5
4
5
7
3
3
8
2
0
3
2
6
1
5
1
1
1
2
0
0
2
2
2
9
3
4
3
5
7
4
.
7
3
3
5
.
3
2
1
6
4
2
9
0
3
6
4
8
9
0
3
0
6
8
7
1
2
6
3
0
3
6
1
6
3
1
1
2
0
0
2
7
3
3
4
0
3
5
7
4
.
6
1
6
.
8
5
.
3
4
5
3
0
6
9
2
0
1
6
2
1
0
2
8
6
7
0
2
9
9
1
7
1
0
2
0
6
1
7
2
0
1
1
2
0
0
2
2
1
3
2
3
6
3
5
7
4
.
6
1
5
6
.
3
2
0
4
3
0
1
1
7
5
5
6
4
7
5
3
5
4
6
8
1
3
4
1
7
1
3
2
2
9
1
8
1
4
2
2
0
0
4
1
0
3
0
2
8
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
2
5
.
4
1
1
1
4
9
5
7
3
3
6
5
1
1
2
2
4
4
1
3
1
1
6
5
2
5
1
3
4
1
9
1
4
2
2
0
0
4
1
1
5
7
3
.
3
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
9
5
.
3
3
3
9
4
0
1
1
9
1
2
3
5
6
6
8
2
2
9
8
3
4
2
7
0
1
8
1
3
6
2
0
3
1
1
0
2
0
0
4
0
1
8
3
9
3
5
7
4
.
5
2
0
.
3
4
.
7
2
4
7
2
2
9
2
7
0
6
8
8
9
3
4
1
6
7
1
5
9
2
3
1
2
4
9
2
1
3
1
1
0
2
0
0
4
6
2
5
6
3
5
7
4
.
4
1
4
.
7
4
.
9
3
9
7
4
1
6
4
3
0
4
7
5
1
6
2
6
1
2
2
3
5
2
0
6
8
8
2
2
2
3
1
1
0
2
0
0
4
6
1
0
3
8
3
5
7
4
.
5
1
2
5
.
1
2
5
3
3
6
6
5
4
2
5
8
1
0
7
2
7
1
7
2
1
4
5
1
1
1
5
5
2
2
3
8
1
0
2
0
0
5
3
5
0
5
2
3
5
7
3
.
6
1
2
7
.
6
3
3
4
4
0
1
2
3
1
1
4
5
7
6
5
2
2
1
9
3
3
4
6
8
2
0
1
2
8
2
4
8
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
0
4
6
3
5
3
5
7
3
.
1
1
2
6
.
4
3
2
8
3
9
1
0
7
1
2
7
5
3
7
7
2
2
6
7
3
4
9
7
8
1
0
1
3
5
2
5
8
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
2
8
3
1
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
4
.
3
5
.
6
3
2
1
3
1
1
0
8
1
2
1
6
0
8
0
2
1
8
1
5
5
7
3
9
1
2
6
2
6
8
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
2
2
5
2
0
3
5
7
3
.
1
1
7
.
2
5
.
7
9
6
4
7
5
5
3
2
1
5
3
1
2
2
3
0
3
2
9
2
6
5
2
5
1
2
1
2
7
8
1
0
2
0
0
5
2
1
1
3
3
4
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
2
5
.
5
8
4
1
1
1
8
1
5
3
5
4
6
8
2
5
9
7
9
7
1
1
8
1
6
7
2
8
8
1
0
2
0
0
5
2
1
4
5
1
3
3
5
7
3
.
3
1
2
5
.
4
3
3
8
3
3
1
2
1
1
2
2
6
2
7
1
2
2
6
1
5
3
5
6
6
7
1
6
1
3
1
(
c
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

T
a
b
l
e
2
.
(
C
o
n
t
i
n
u
e
d
)
.
N
o
.
D
A
M
O
Y
R
H
R
M
N
S
E
C
L
a
t
.
L
o
n
g
.
D
e
p
t
h
M
w
P
l
a
n
e
1
A
z
i
m
u
t
h
P
l
a
n
e
1
D
i
p
P
l
a
n
e
1
R
a
k
e
P
l
a
n
e
2
A
z
i
m
u
t
h
P
l
a
n
e
2
D
i
p
P
l
a
n
e
2
R
a
k
e
P
a
x
i
s
A
z
i
m
u
t
h
P
a
x
i
s
D
i
p
T
a
x
i
s
A
z
i
m
u
t
h
T
a
x
i
s
D
i
p
N
a
x
i
s
D
i
p
N
a
x
i
s
A
z
i
m
u
t
h
2
9
8
1
0
2
0
0
5
2
2
4
3
1
3
5
7
3
.
3
1
2
4
.
9
2
7
9
2
5
3
3
1
5
9
7
7
1
1
2
2
3
2
2
8
9
5
5
4
2
1
3
3
4
3
0
8
1
0
2
0
0
5
2
2
5
3
4
6
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
2
4
.
8
3
5
4
2
3
1
1
6
1
4
5
6
9
7
9
2
4
4
2
4
3
8
6
4
1
0
1
4
9
3
1
9
1
0
2
0
0
5
4
5
8
5
7
3
5
7
3
.
1
1
2
5
2
8
2
2
8
8
7
1
0
5
6
2
9
2
1
9
4
1
7
1
9
7
3
1
2
8
4
3
2
9
1
0
2
0
0
5
7
9
2
1
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
2
5
.
3
3
1
5
2
9
1
0
4
1
1
9
6
2
8
2
2
1
5
1
7
1
1
7
2
7
1
2
3
3
3
9
1
0
2
0
0
5
8
3
0
6
.
3
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
2
5
.
7
3
4
4
3
7
1
2
1
1
2
7
5
9
6
9
2
3
2
1
2
3
5
4
6
8
1
8
1
3
9
3
4
9
1
0
2
0
0
5
8
5
9
3
8
3
5
7
3
.
3
1
2
4
.
8
2
7
9
2
1
4
2
1
5
0
7
6
1
0
6
2
2
7
2
9
8
0
5
6
1
6
3
2
6
3
5
9
1
0
2
0
0
5
9
2
2
3
4
3
5
7
3
.
4
1
2
4
.
9
1
5
1
6
2
1
5
4
2
5
4
6
7
3
1
2
2
4
1
1
4
3
7
5
3
2
8
7
3
6
9
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
1
2
1
4
5
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
5
.
7
5
3
2
8
2
2
1
3
0
1
0
5
7
3
7
5
2
0
7
2
7
3
5
5
5
9
1
4
1
1
0
3
7
9
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
2
3
8
1
5
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
2
4
.
9
2
8
4
3
8
1
0
7
8
2
5
4
7
7
1
8
2
8
3
0
9
7
7
1
1
9
0
3
8
9
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
9
2
0
4
0
3
4
7
3
.
7
1
2
5
.
3
2
8
6
3
7
1
0
4
8
9
5
4
7
9
1
8
6
8
3
2
1
7
8
8
9
5
3
9
9
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
9
4
7
0
.
8
3
5
7
3
1
7
4
.
9
2
5
7
4
7
6
3
1
1
4
4
9
1
1
6
1
8
6
1
9
2
7
1
1
9
2
7
6
4
0
1
0
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
2
3
8
1
2
3
5
7
3
.
1
1
2
4
.
9
3
0
7
4
3
1
3
7
7
1
6
2
5
6
1
8
5
1
1
2
9
3
5
8
3
0
8
9
4
1
1
2
1
0
2
0
0
5
2
0
2
3
4
4
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
2
5
.
3
3
1
5
4
2
9
7
1
2
6
4
9
8
4
2
2
0
4
3
4
8
8
4
5
1
2
9
4
2
1
3
1
0
2
0
0
5
2
0
4
9
2
6
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
3
.
6
4
.
9
3
4
9
4
0
1
2
2
1
3
1
5
7
6
6
2
3
7
9
3
5
1
6
8
2
0
1
4
4
4
3
1
4
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
9
3
7
4
8
3
5
7
3
.
2
2
0
.
4
4
.
8
1
1
7
3
3
4
9
3
4
4
6
6
1
1
3
5
7
1
8
2
9
0
6
2
2
1
1
5
4
4
4
1
7
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
0
4
3
1
0
3
5
7
3
.
2
2
1
.
2
4
.
9
3
1
4
4
0
1
0
4
1
1
6
5
1
7
9
2
1
4
6
3
3
7
8
0
9
1
2
3
4
5
1
8
1
0
2
0
0
5
2
1
2
0
7
.
8
3
5
7
3
.
1
1
2
5
2
9
9
3
2
1
0
3
1
0
4
5
9
8
2
2
0
0
1
4
3
5
3
7
4
7
1
0
8
4
6
1
9
1
0
2
0
0
5
2
3
3
3
3
3
5
7
3
.
1
1
2
5
.
6
3
0
3
3
1
1
0
5
1
0
6
6
0
8
1
2
0
2
1
5
3
5
3
7
3
8
1
1
0
4
7
1
9
1
0
2
0
0
5
3
1
6
2
6
3
5
7
3
.
1
1
2
5
.
4
3
0
8
4
4
1
0
3
1
1
0
4
7
7
8
2
0
9
2
3
1
0
8
1
9
1
1
9
4
8
1
9
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
2
4
7
3
3
3
5
7
3
.
1
1
2
5
.
1
3
0
6
3
3
5
6
1
6
5
6
3
1
1
0
2
4
0
1
6
1
1
2
6
6
1
8
3
3
5
4
9
2
3
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
5
4
2
3
3
5
7
3
1
2
5
.
5
3
0
7
3
2
1
1
0
1
0
5
6
0
7
8
2
0
3
1
4
3
4
6
7
2
1
0
1
1
1
5
0
2
3
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
9
2
8
2
7
3
5
7
3
.
1
1
2
4
.
8
2
9
3
3
4
1
2
3
7
5
6
2
7
0
1
8
0
1
4
3
0
6
6
7
1
8
8
5
5
1
2
4
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
3
1
4
1
5
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
6
.
9
4
.
8
6
8
4
3
5
4
2
9
2
5
7
1
1
8
3
8
2
5
6
6
6
2
3
9
6
5
2
2
6
1
0
2
0
0
5
1
4
2
4
5
3
4
7
3
.
9
2
1
.
9
4
.
8
2
6
6
3
2
4
1
1
4
0
7
0
1
1
5
2
1
1
2
1
8
4
5
7
2
4
3
1
0
5
3
2
8
1
0
2
0
0
5
2
1
3
4
1
8
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
2
5
.
2
3
5
7
3
8
1
3
2
1
2
9
6
3
6
3
2
3
8
1
3
3
5
5
6
2
2
4
1
4
2
5
4
6
1
1
2
0
0
5
2
1
1
5
6
3
5
7
3
.
4
1
3
5
.
1
2
7
4
1
4
3
4
1
5
1
8
2
1
0
2
2
3
1
3
6
7
4
5
1
1
2
3
2
9
5
5
2
0
1
1
2
0
0
5
5
3
5
6
.
3
3
5
7
3
.
2
2
0
.
5
4
.
8
3
4
5
4
2
1
0
6
1
4
4
5
0
7
6
2
4
4
4
3
5
6
7
8
1
1
1
5
3
5
6
2
1
1
1
2
0
0
5
8
2
6
1
4
3
5
7
3
.
1
1
2
5
.
2
3
4
1
5
5
1
5
9
8
3
7
3
3
7
2
0
9
1
1
3
0
8
3
8
5
0
1
0
5
5
7
1
1
2
2
0
0
5
1
5
3
8
2
9
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
3
.
2
4
.
7
1
0
4
4
1
1
0
3
2
6
8
5
0
7
9
6
4
1
2
2
8
1
8
2
7
5
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

5
8
2
5
1
2
2
0
0
5
8
2
1
0
3
5
7
3
.
3
1
5
.
2
5
.
2
5
1
0
1
7
0
1
0
5
8
8
8
0
2
0
5
4
2
5
4
6
1
0
1
0
5
5
9
2
8
1
2
2
0
0
5
2
2
4
3
7
3
5
7
3
.
4
2
8
.
6
5
.
1
1
2
7
1
1
7
4
2
8
1
8
4
1
9
2
3
5
1
7
3
2
8
9
7
1
8
4
6
0
2
2
2
0
0
6
2
1
4
9
3
.
7
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
8
.
8
4
.
9
1
6
0
4
2
1
2
0
3
0
2
5
4
6
6
4
9
6
1
5
6
6
9
2
0
3
1
7
6
1
8
2
2
0
0
6
1
2
5
7
3
2
3
5
7
3
.
3
3
3
.
1
4
.
8
3
0
6
3
3
8
4
1
3
3
5
7
9
4
2
2
0
1
2
5
6
7
7
3
3
1
1
6
2
1
0
3
2
0
0
6
7
5
0
1
7
3
3
7
3
.
8
2
4
.
7
4
.
9
2
4
6
2
1
6
1
9
6
7
1
1
0
1
1
7
8
2
6
2
2
6
2
1
0
2
7
3
6
3
1
9
3
2
0
0
6
2
4
9
4
.
1
3
5
7
3
.
2
2
2
.
7
4
.
9
3
1
9
3
5
9
1
1
3
8
5
5
8
9
2
2
8
1
0
4
4
8
0
1
1
3
8
6
4
2
0
3
2
0
0
6
1
7
4
0
4
9
3
5
7
3
.
8
1
2
5
.
2
1
8
5
4
7
3
2
7
2
6
7
1
3
2
1
3
3
1
2
2
9
4
9
3
8
2
3
2
6
5
4
4
2
0
0
6
9
1
2
2
3
3
5
7
3
.
2
1
2
4
.
6
9
8
4
4
5
7
3
2
0
5
4
1
1
7
3
1
6
2
8
7
6
7
2
2
1
2
3
6
6
2
6
1
0
2
0
0
7
6
5
0
1
0
3
5
7
6
.
7
1
2
5
.
2
2
7
4
6
6
1
0
8
8
0
1
5
6
2
3
3
2
4
1
3
9
1
0
6
4
2
8
6
7
1
1
1
2
2
0
0
7
1
5
5
6
4
1
3
5
7
7
.
5
2
0
.
5
5
.
1
2
6
3
5
3
1
3
1
7
9
1
4
3
2
2
9
3
4
1
2
7
1
7
5
1
1
5
6
8
2
0
2
2
0
0
9
3
4
8
5
4
3
4
7
3
.
8
1
7
.
6
5
.
5
3
0
8
2
1
9
9
1
1
8
7
0
8
7
2
1
1
2
5
2
2
6
5
3
1
1
9
6
9
2
7
7
2
0
0
9
6
2
3
5
3
3
5
7
3
.
2
2
5
.
9
5
3
3
8
3
4
1
3
0
1
1
3
6
5
6
7
2
2
0
1
7
3
4
5
6
3
2
1
1
2
3
7
0
6
1
2
2
0
0
9
4
3
3
2
2
3
6
7
7
.
4
1
1
1
5
.
2
3
4
8
1
9
1
5
8
9
9
8
3
7
3
2
0
4
3
6
3
5
0
4
9
1
7
1
0
1
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

Figure 6. Beach ball diagrams of 70 numbers of fault plane solutions listed in table 2 and
located on the map with numbers (gure 5).
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

A similar stress increase along southeast of rupture near Kashmir Basin indicates
seismic vulnerability of Kashmir basin, where faults participated in the large earth-
quakes of 1555 and 1885 (Nos. 3 and 14 of Figure 2). This indicates recurrence pat-
tern of large earthquakes in this zone. Moreover, the high gravity value in the
epicentral block indicates thrusting accompanied by mass movement of high-density
rocks along the syntaxial bend of MBT (Tiwari et al. 2009). The tectonic loading of
the high-density Muzaffarabad wedge thrust between the wedge top and the descend-
ing Indian lithosphere coupled with continued exure tectonics and block rotation
provoked this earthquake (Khan et al. 2010). They also opined that the western limb
of the buckled unit (containing both competent and incompetent rocks) of Kashmir
Hazara Syntaxis gave rise to the development of a new thrust and associated oblique
slip in the inner arc of the competent rock unit produced the earthquake.
Furthermore, the coseismic landslide occurrences show a clear spatial association
with the pre-existing faults such as the JF and MBT as indicated earlier and align-
ment of landslide along a particular direction also indicates reactivation of a new
fault (Kumar et al. 2006). Large to moderate slip recorded by the present and his-
toric earthquakes in this sector are up dip along the rupture plane and controlled by
thrusting.
The seismo-geological section AA
/
(gure 3(b)) along the Kohistan arc and Kash-
mirHazara syntaxis (Zones A and B) has brought out the conguration of sub-
ducted Indian Plate beneath the Eurasian Plate and the accretionary Himalayan,
Kohistan and Karakoram arc litho-packages overriding it. This also intersects the
visible spatial seismic clusters of Kohistan arc and KashmirHazara syntaxis. The
MBT and MMT are the most active tectonic planes along this section line showing
majority thrust with subordinate strike-slip movements, respectively. The Hazara
Kashmir cluster around traces of MBT and activated Muzaffarabad fault has thrust
plane solutions with high angle tension along NWSE direction and low angle com-
pression along NESW direction. The fault plane solutions also indicate thrusting
with subordinate strike-slip motion along a NWSE fault plane dipping moderately
towards SW.
4.3. Nanga-Parbat Syntaxis (Zone C of gure 3(a))
This zone shows low to moderate seismicity with occurrence of an earthquake of
Ms 5.2 (1.8.1947; No. 28 table 1 and Figure 2) in historical times. Though
seismically insignicant, the zone is tectonically interesting and required elucida-
tion. Actively deformed uplifted dome with high-grade gneissic rocks of
Nanga-ParbatHarmosh massif at its core is characteristic of this zone. In fact,
Nanga-Parbat is a structural enigma from the viewpoint of seismic activity and
tectonic movement is quite comparable to that for the Mt. Everest in the Nepal
Himalaya (see Poretti et al. 2010 for detailed discussion). The anks of the Nanga-
Parbat dome are represented by seismically active shear zones/faults. The geody-
namic interactions of these shear zones/faults aided by mass removal due to deep
river erosion of Indus have exposed the exhumed Cenozoic metamorphic rocks,
granulites and granites (Nanga-Parbat massif) of the Indian Plate. The earthquakes
surrounding the Nanga-Parbat Syntaxis are generated from the Indian Plate. The
western ank of the dome with active Raikhot fault and Diamer shear zone is
seismically more active in comparison to the eastern ank that shows diffused
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

seismicity. This is probably because of bending of Nanga-Parbat area towards east
as suggested by Poretti et al. 2010 from preliminary analysis of global navigation
satellite system network data. The fault plane solutions show oblique slip/strike-
slip motions along NS to NESW plane and normal fault movements along
NESW trending moderately SE dipping fault planes (gure 5(a), 5(c) and 6). To
compensate the rapid vertical uplift occurring in this zone, normal (gravity) faulting
at shallow crustal level (~20 km) occurred as a part of crustal adjustment. The ten-
sional axis is sub-horizontal oriented NWSE direction, whereas the compressional
axes vary in plunge and its orientations. The thickening of the crust ~75 km com-
pared to the surrounding regions is worth mentioning (see Mukhopadhyay et al.
2011b). The fault plane solutions and concentration of earthquakes along the
Raikhot fault support the hypothesis of upward directed mass owage, uparching,
rapid erosion by contemporaneous rivers and tectonic aneurysm of Indian Plate
(Zeitler et al. 2001; Koons et al. 2002, and references therein). The uparching and
thickening of the Indian Plate (as shown in the sections of gure 3(b)) is further
corroborated the results generated by the micro-seismic surveys conducted by
Meltzer et al. (2001). They have also found a bow like upward shape of seismicity
following the anti-formal arch at a shallow crustal level. The Magneto Teluric
surveys (Park & Mackie 1997, 2000) conducted in this region have also pointed out
a resistive zone at around 50-km depth below the massif, and another zone situated
in top 1 km below the surface limit is quite conductive. Similarly, the zone around
Raikhot fault from surface to a depth of 10 km is also conductive. The resistive
zone has been interpreted as dehydrated zone with insufcient interconnected uid
phase, whereas the conductive zone is hydrated by percolating water from top and
possible pore-pressure perturbations in interconnected uid zones. Seismic tomog-
raphy conducted in this region has predicted lower velocity lozenge of crust
extended at a depth below the core of the massif and indicates rapid exhumation,
high thermal gradient, crustal uid ow and pockets of decompression melting,
and subsequent generation of young metamorphic and igneous ages of the rocks
(Meltzer et al. 2001; Zeitler et al. 2001; Zeitler & Chamberlain 2001).
The sections (BB
/
and CC
/
), one along axial trace and the other along prole
section of the popup anti-formal structure, are constructed (gure 3(b)) to dene the
crustal structure of Nanga-Parbat region. This zone has ve fault plane solutions.
The beach ball indicates strike-slip motions along NS to NESW plane, whereas
others show normal fault movements along NESW trending moderately SE dipping
plane. The pure strike-slip solution along NS plane with vertical dipping fault plane
indicates a possible adjustment of the crust following rapid uplifting and mass ow-
age. Moderate slips recorded by the earthquakes in this sector are mainly down dip
or along the strike of the rupture plane.
4.4. Karakoram arc (Zone D of gure 3(a))
The seismicity around northeastern side (gure 3(a)) of the Western Himalaya is the
Karakoram sector that shows seismicity from both shallow and deep focus zones.
The most conspicuous faults are dextral strike-slip Karakoram fault that extends
1000 km from the eastern boundary of Pamir syntaxis to Kumaon Himalaya and its
conjugate one is Altyn Tagh fault. Towards south, Shyok suture separates the
Karakoram fault from IndusShyok belt. This sector does not show major
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

large magnitude seismicity. Historical seismicity of magnitude ranging from 5.5 to
6.0 (Nos. 1821 table 1 and gure 2) formed due to movement along Shyok suture
zone and Karakoram fault. The seismo-geological section (by our previous study, see
gure 5(d) of Mukhopadhyay et al. 2011b) along Karakoram sector indicates activa-
tion of Karakoram and Altyn Tagh faults. The fault plane solutions indicate strike-
slip movement of the crust along EW to ESEWNW striking planes dipping at
moderate to high angle on either side of Karakoram and Altyn Tagh Faults. This
zone, by and large, demonstrate strike-slip trans-tensional tectonism between MKT
and Altyn Tagh Fault (ATF) in the Karakoram domain where litho-units experience
arc-parallel mass owage towards east (Seeber and Pecher 1998). Moderate slip has
been recorded by the earthquakes in this sector are mainly along the strike of the
rupture plane.
4.5. Himachal Himalaya (Zone E of gure 3(a))
The seismic zone in lesser Himalaya towards southeast of the Jhelum re-entrant is
designated here as Himachal Himalaya. This is one of the most seismic prone zones
of entire sub-Himalaya. The seismotectonic characteristics and damage potentiality
of this zone are described in details in our earlier publications with estimation of
MCE as Mw 8.29 (Mukhopadhyay et al. 2011a, 2011b). In this belt, the north-
ernmost structural element is MCT. The lesser Himalayan rocks are separated from
frontal belt by MBT. The southernmost limit of the frontal belt is marked by MFT.
Within MBT and MFT, there are several subsidiary thrusts such as Vaikrita,
Jwalamukhi and Drang thrusts. Evidences of neotectonic activity are marked along
several places of MBT and western part of Jwalamukhi thrust. The Sundernagar and
Kishtwar faults within this fold thrust belt are important transverse features. In the
foothill regions, the transverse Ropar fault placed NW of Chandigarh and Jamuna
tear with sinistral movement in the east are important neotectonic faults. The
seismo-geological section (by our previous study, see gure 5(d) of Mukhopadhyay
et al. 2011b and gure 5(b) of Mukhopadhyay et al. 2011a) along this zone show
that seismicity is shallow focus and all known tectonic planes are active and mani-
fested by seismicity of various degrees. This zone is characterized by large earth-
quakes in the past such as September 1555 (No. 3 of table 1) and devastating 4 April
1905 Kangra earthquake (No. 15 of table 1) in recent time. The September 1555
(M 7.6) is possibly related to MBT. Similarly, if the epicentral location (33.00N:
76.00E) of the 1905 Kangra earthquake (Ambraseys and Douglas, 2004) is correct,
then the earthquake may be generated by movement along MBT (?) or allied sympa-
thetic thrust. Otherwise, if the epicentral location as given in IMD catalogue
(32.30N: 76.20E) is considered then the scenario changes (see Dasgupta et al. 2000;
SEISAT-05) and this major earthquake could be due to activity of Intra-Siwalik
structure like the Jwalamukhi thrust. The moderate magnitude earthquakes (Nos. 9,
16, 39, 49 of table 1) are the product of movement along the frontal thrust belt. The
overall fault plane solutions indicate thrusting along plane striking NWSE dipping
at low angle towards NE related to southwesterly movement of Main Frontal Thrust
(MFT) and MBT (table 2; gures 5(a) and 6). The movement of the thrust planes has
given rise to four important earthquakes in recent times; they are 22 June 1945
Chamba earthquake, 23 August 1980 Kathua earthquake, 26 April 1986
Dharamshala earthquake and 24 march 1995 Chamba earthquake. These
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

earthquakes cause severe damages to the buildings, producing earth ssures and
sometimes accompanied with loss of human lives.
It is worth noticing that the epicentral zone of the 1555 (or 1552) earthquake in
Kashmir valley is presently producing sporadic low to moderate magnitude shallow
focus shocks (gure 3(a)). The question may be asked whether this zone is currently
undergoing spatio-temporal quiescence or it belongs to strain shadow zone of 2005
Muzaffarabad earthquake? More detailed study is required to resolve the future seis-
mic potentiality of Kashmir valley.
The section (DD
/
, gure 3(b)) along Karakoram arc and Himachal Himalaya
(Zones D and E) was drawn across Himalaya, Ladakh and Karakoram arc to dene
the tectonic movement along the Main HimalayaLadakhKarakoram arc segment.
Along this line, all known tectonic planes are active and manifested by seismicity of
various degrees. The Himachal Himalayan zone has fault plane solutions that indi-
cate thrusting along plane striking NWSE dipping at low angle towards NE. These
solutions point out southwesterly movement of MFT and MBT. The Karakoram
sector along the section line towards north has fault plane solutions that indicate
strike-slip movement of the crust along EW to ESEWNW striking planes dipping
at moderate to high angle on either side of Karakoram and Altyn Tagh faults. Large
to moderate slip recorded by the present and historic earthquakes in the Himachal
Himalaya are mostly up dip along the rupture plane and controlled by thrusting,
whereas the slip along Karakoram arc is mostly along strike of the arc.
5. Analysis and evaluation of b-value
The b-value analysis has been carried out as a sequence to identify the precursory
trend and crustal heterogeneity in the seismic zones described in Section 4. More
precisely, we analyse the b-value pattern through documentation of both spatio-
temporal (after Smith 1986) and temporal (after Meredith et al. 1990) changes in
b-value to evaluate whether there is any signicant change before the large earth-
quake of 8 October 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake. The b-value is calculated by
maximum-likelihood method (Aki 1965; Ustu 1965; Bender 1983), b = log
10
e/
(MM
min
) = 0.43/(MM
min
), where M denotes the mean magnitude and M
min
denotes the minimum magnitude of completeness in the given sample. As b-value is
dependent on data, earthquake data have been treated separately as per techniques
described by Kulhanek (2005) to make the calculated b-value statistically robust and
tectonically signicant. For calculating b-value, earthquake data from the study area
in 1
block with 0.5
overlapping both along latitude and longitude are selected;

time period is chosen in such a way that more earthquake data can be subjected to
calculation. The b-values obtained for each block are plotted at the centre of the
block and contoured. Data of three consecutive time domains (19691980, 1981
1992 and 19932004) prior to the Muzaffarabad earthquake (~Zone B) is used to
create temporal summaries of the b-value changes. Similarly, the time period between
2005 and 2010 is used to understand the stress redistribution that have caused by the
Muzaffarabad earthquake over the region and identify the zones of future seismic
potentiality. As an offshoot, we have also studied the zone (~zone E) around the
epicentre of 1905 Kangra earthquake to unearth any signicant precursory b-value
changes. Map dates adopted (gure 7) for respective temporal bins are after
Smith (1986).
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

A uniform distribution of low b-value (~0.5) is observed throughout the region for
the map date 01.01.1981 (gure 7(a)). In the next map of 01.01.93 (gure 7(b)) the
background b-value increases to 0.78 along with further rise to 0.89 surrounding the
epicentral tract of the 2005 earthquake. In the map of 01.01.2004 (gure 7(c)),
b-value scenario is different; immediate to the southeast of the 2005 epicentre,
b-value increases in the range of 0.891.01, followed by further sharp rise to the
southeast. Towards northwest b-value also sharply rises to as high 1.58. Numerically,
relative high b-values result from data population with large number of smaller
events (e.g. swarms) or paucity of moderate events; such regions are considered ripe
for the generation of large magnitude earthquake as has been documented by Smith
(1986) with examples from New Zealand and California. The b-value scenario
depicted through different temporal bins (gures 7(a) , 7(b) and 7(c)) should be
viewed together that indicate progressive rise of b-value within a xed region before
a large earthquake in the vicinity. In specic cases such large earthquakes locate spa-
tially close to higher b-value contour (see Smith 1986) or close to steepest transition
Figure 7. Maps showing spatial variation in b-value from time domain 1969 to 2010; b-value
map of (a) January 1981 (earthquake database January 1969December 1980), yellow box
indicates the epicentral block of Muzaffarabad earthquake, (b) January 1993 (earthquake
database January 1981December 1992), (c) January 2005 (earthquake database January
1993December 2004), (d) January 2011 (earthquake database January 2005December 2010),
b-value is calculated for 1
blocks plotted at the centre of each block and contoured.

Epicentre for the 8 October 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake (star) and 1905 Kangra earth-
quake as lled circle are shown. Note that the epicentre of 2005 locates close to the moderate
high b-value zone.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

in b-values (Urbancic et al. 1992). Under normal circumstances, the next map
(gure 7(d)) should have been with a lower background b-value due to the incorpo-
ration of large magnitude 2005 earthquake along with its several moderate magni-
tude aftershocks in the data population; however, the scenario is different with
greater part of the region displaying b-value in the range of 1.121.23; and a further
increase in the range of 1.35 to 1.46 to the southeast corner near the epicentre of the
1905 great earthquake. This is an anomalous phenomenon and needs further probe,
as it is likely to strike by another large earthquake.
Unlike spatial scenario of changes in b-value, which often becomes signicant
in the form of high b-value anomaly several years before a possible large shock,
in purely temporal variation such precursory signature is rather short lived.
Temporal variation in b-value (after Meredith et al. 1990) is studied for epicen-
tral tract (yellow box in gure 7(a)) of the 2005 earthquake with data from 1974
onwards (gure 8). The b-value was calculated by maximum likelihood method
for different temporal bins with standard error on estimation are approximately
b/
_
N, where N is number of earthquake data. It may be noted that the tempo-
ral bins are of variable window depending on the minimum availability of data
required in the early periods but kept as three years from 1997 and two years
bin from 2003 for detailing as one approach the main event of 2005. It is of sig-
nicance that standard error in b estimation is higher prior to 2000 due to rela-
tive small number of earthquake data (see gure 8); the b-values became more
stable after 2000. The high b-value of 1.45 (20002002) has been interpreted as
intermediate-term recovery precursor (see Meredith et al. 1990) after the rela-
tively lower value of 1.09 for eight years between 1992 and 1999; such high
b-values are often correlated with temporal quiescence. During the subsequent
period 20032004, b-value sharply fell to 0.72 indicating high stress concentra-
tions that are immediately followed by the earthquake of October 2005. Thus in
the temporal b-value variation scenario it is highlow couplet that gives the
precursor.
Figure 8. Temporal variation in b-value in the epicentral block (marked as box in gure 7(a))
of 8 October 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake. See the standard error in b-value estimation in
different bins as table. Note the highlow b-value couplet preceding the 2005 Muzaffarabad
earthquake.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

6. Forecast of maximum magnitude with return period
In seismic hazard analysis, the quantication of size of MCE with return period is a
prerequisite and can be achieved through Gumbels extreme value statistics. Extreme
value statistics arise as limiting distributions for maximums or minimums of a sample
of independent, identically distributed random variables for measuring events of very
low occurrence probability. The theory has been used extensively for forecasting of
large earthquakes; this has also been studied by different authors (see among others;
Shanker & Sharma 1998; Sarmah 1999; Vyas et al. 2005; Shanker et al. 2007; Yadav
et al. 2011 and 2012, etc.) with seismicity data to predict future possible M
max
for dif-
ferent parts of Himalaya. Accordingly, following Gumbel (1958) extreme value sta-
tistics (see Appendix I) the largest observed magnitude (Mw
max
) for successive
10 years interval is separated out from earthquake data (time period 18202010).
The different Mw
max
are arranged in increasing order of magnitude with rank j = 1,
2, 3, . . .19 and Pj (plotting position of j observation) is calculated for all intervals via
equation (7) (Appendix I). In linear graph paper Mw
max
is plotted (gure 9) against
reduced variate R, i.e. ln(ln Pj) (see equation (5) of Appendix I). The probability
distribution between ln(ln Pj) and Mw
max
is tted by an asymptotic curve as per
Gumbel type III probability distribution (gure 9). Considering return periods T as
10, 50, 100 and 200 years, reduced variate R is calculated (vide equation (8) of
Appendix I) for all T. R-values are plotted in gure 9 and graphically Mw
max
for
each return period is calculated (table 3). The analysis indicates a probability of
occurrence of an event of Mw > 7.0 in the next 50 years within the study area.
Figure 9. Type III Gumbel probability plot between the R, reduce variate [ln(ln Pj)] and
Mw
max
with the model for the period 18202010. The expected extreme magnitude for chosen
return period is tabulated (table 3).
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

7. Conclusion
Western Himalaya has been shaken numerous times by large earthquakes in the past
500 years, though earlier earthquakes are known only from fragmentary archival
sources. We present here a succinct summary of the past earthquakes from available
sources to highlight the seismic potentiality of the region. Our analysis also assigns
new locations to the past earthquakes and also helps in removing the conicting
records of occurrences that present in the modern literature. The nal outcome is
thus a complete catalogue with earthquake magnitude ascertained in moment magni-
tude scale for the time period 15012010.
Contemporary seismotectonics in the region of 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake
have been evaluated. Occurrence of seismicity clusters, CMT solutions of moder-
ate and large earthquakes and underlying geology reveal the seismic heterogeneity
within the terrain. Earthquake cluster within the epicentral zone of Muzaffarabad
earthquake and their aftershocks in the Western Syntaxis show a close faultthrust
interaction between Muzaffarabad fault, Tanda fault and splays of MBT.
Seismicity in Nanga-Parbat cluster is controlled by seismic activities related to the
Raikhot fault and Diamir Shear with strike-slip sense of movement present in
the western side of the tectonic dome. The thickened Indian Plate controls the
seismicity.
Spatio-temporal variations of b-value from the study area show progressive rise of
background b-value through time and the main shock 2005 Muzaffarabad earth-
quake is located close to relative high b-value domains. Regions surrounding the
location of the 1905 earthquake also display such high b-value for the period 2005
2010 that calls for forewarn of another large shock.
Temporal variation in b-value is studied for epicentral tract of the 2005 earthquake
with data from 1974 onwards. The high b-value of 1.45 (20002002) has been inter-
preted as intermediate-term recovery after the relatively lower value of 1.09 for eight
years between 1992 and 1999; such high b-values are often correlated with temporal
quiescence. During the subsequent period 20032004, b-value sharply fell to 0.72 fol-
lowed by the earthquake of October 2005 Muzaffarabad earthquake.
Gumbel extreme value statistics also indicate a probability of occurrence of an
event of Mw > 7.0 in the next 50 years.
Acknowledgements
Authors acknowledge with gratitude the keen interest shown by Prof. Ramesh P. Singh, Editor
in Chief, for publishing this paper. They also acknowledge the learned reviewers for thoughtful
and constructive comments on earlier versions of the manuscript, which have considerably
improved the scientic content and quality of presentation of the paper.
Table 3. Expected return period with expected maximum mag-
nitude (Mw) as per Gumbels extreme value statistics.
Return period (T in years) Expected magnitude (Mw)
10 5.90
50 7.30
100 7.85
200 8.30
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

References
Ambraseys N, Douglas J. 2004. Magnitude calibration on North Indian earthquakes. Geophys
J Int. 159:165206.
Ambraseys N, Jackson D. 2003. A note on early earthquakes in northern India and southern
tibet. Curr Sci. 84:570582.
Aki K. 1965. Maximum likelihood estimate of b in the formula log N = a-bM and its con-
dence limits. Bull Earthquake Res Inst Tokyo Univ. 43:237239.
Avouac JP, Ayoub F, Leprince S, Konca O, Helmberger D. 2006. The 2005, Mw 7.6 Kashmir
earthquake: sub-pixel correlation of ASTER images and seismic waveforms analysis.
Earth Planet Sci Lett. 249:514528.
Baird-Smith R. 1843. Memoirs on Indian earthquakes. J Asiat Soc Bengal. 12(2):10291056.
Bashir A, Bhat MI, Bali BS. 2009. Historical record of earthquakes in the Kashmir Valley.
J Himalayan Geol. 30(1):7584.
Bender B. 1983. Maximum likelihood estimation of b values for magnitude grouped data. Bull
Seism Soc Am. 73(3):831851.
Bettinelli P, Avouac JP, Flouzat M, Jouanne F, Bollinger L, Willis P, Chitrakar GR. 2006.
Plate motion of India and interseismic strain in the Nepal Himalaya from GPS and
DORIS measurements. J Geodesy. 80:567589
Bilham R. 2004. Earthquakes in India and the Himalaya: tectonics, geodesy and history. Ann
Geophys. 47:839858.
Bilham R, Ambraseys N. 2005. Apparent Himalayan slip decit from the summation of seis-
mic moments for Himalayan earthquakes, 15002000. Curr Sci. 881:6581663.
Bilham R, Wallace K. 2005. Future Mw > 8 earthquakes in the Himalaya: implication from
the 26 Dec 2004 MW = 9.0 earthquake on Indias eastern plate margin. Geol Surv
India Special Publication. 85:114.
Bilham R, Singh B, Bhat I, Hough S. 2010. Historical earthquakes in Srinagar, Kashmir: clues
from the Shiva temple at Pandrethan, In: Sintubin, M, Stewart, IS, Niemi, TM, Altu-
nel, E. editors. Ancient earthquakes. Geological Society of America Special Paper,
471:112.
Chandra U. 1978. Seismicity, earthquake mechanisms and tectonics along the Himalayan
mountain range and vicinity. Phys Earth Planet Interiors. 16:109131.
Dasgupta S, Pande P, Ganguly D, Iqbal Z, Sanyal K, Venkatraman NV, Dasgupta S, Sural B,
Harendranath L, Mazumdar S, et al. 2000. Seismotectonic atlas of India and its envi-
rons. Geol Surv India Special Publication. 59:143
Dutt JC. 1887. Kings of Kashmir (Rajatarangini including works of Kalhan, Jouraja, Srivara,
Prajya Bhatt and Suka). Vol 3. New Delhi: Mittal Publishers.
Feldl N, Bilham R. 2006. Great Himalayan earthquakes and the tibetan plateau. Nature.
444:165170.
Fujiwara S, Tobita M, Sato HP, Ozawa S, Une H, Koarai M, Nakai H, Fujiwara M, Yarai H,
Nishimura T, Hayashi F. 2006. Satellite data give snapshot of the 2005 Pakistan earth-
quake. Eos, Trans Amer Geophys Union. 87:7384
Gumbel EJ. 1958. Statistics of Extremes. New York: Columbia Univ. Press; p. 375
Gutenberg B, Richter CF. 1956. Magnitude and energy of earthquakes. Ann. Geos. 9:115.
Hanks T, Kanamori H. 1979. A moment magnitude scale. J Geophys Res. 84:23482350.
Hough SE, Bilham R, Ambraseys N, Feldl N. 2005. Revisiting the 1897 Shillong and 1905
Kangra earthquakes in northern India: site response, moho reections and a triggered
earthquake. Current Science. 88(10):16321638.
Iyengar RN, Sharma D, Siddiqui JM. 1999. Earthquake history of India in medieval times.
Indian J Hist Sci. 34(3):181237.
Jones EJ. 1885a. Notes on the Kashmir earthquake of 30th May 1885. Records Geol Surv
India. 18:153156.
Jones EJ. 1885b. Report on the Kashmir earthquake of 30th May 1885. Records Geol Surv
India. 18:221227.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

Kamp U, Growley BJ, Khattak GA, Owen LA. 2008. GIS-based landslide susceptibility map-
ping for the 2005 Kashmir earthquake region. Geomorphology. 101:631642
Khan PK, Mohanty S, Mohanty M. 2010. Geodynamic implications for the 8 October 2005
north Pakistan earthquake. Surv Geophys. 31:85106
Kondo H, Nakata T, Akhtar SS, Wesnousky SG, Sugito N, Kaneda H, Tsutsumi H, Khan
AM, Khattak W, Kausar AB. 2008. Long recurrence interval of faulting beyond the
2005 Kashmir earthquake around the northwestern margin of the Indo-Asian collision
zone. Geology. 36:731734.
Koons PO, Zeitler PK, Chamberlain CP, Craw D, Meltzer AS. 2002. Mechanical links
between erosion and metamorphism in Nanga Parbat, Pakistan Himalaya. Am J Sci.
302:749773.
Kulhanek O. 2005. Seminar on b-value. Prague: Dept. of Geophysics, Charles University,
December 1019, 2005.
Kumar VK, Martha TR, Roy PS. 2006. Mapping damage in the Jammu and Kashmir caused
by 8 October 2005 M
w
7.3 earthquake from the cartosat1 and resourcesat1 imagery.
Int J Remote Sens. 27:44494459.
Lawrence WR. 1895. The Valley of Kashmir. New Delhi: Gulshan Publication; p. 478.
Mahajan AK, Kumar N, Arora BR. 2006. Quick look isoseismal map of 8 October 2005 Kash-
mir earthquake. Curr Sci. 91:356361.
Meltzer AS, Sarker GL, Beaudoin B, Seeber L, Ambruster J. 2001. Seismic characterization of an
active metamorphic massif, Nanga Parbat, Pakistan Himalaya. Geology. 29:651654.
Meredith PG, Main IG, Jones C. 1990. Temporal variations in seismicity during quasi-static
and dynamic rock failure. Tectonophysics. 175:249268.
Merewether W. 1853. A report of the disastrous consequences of the severe earthquake felt on
the frontier of upper scinde on the 24
th
January, 1852. Trans Bombay Geographical
Soc. X:284286.
Middlemiss CS. 1910. The Kangra earthquake of 4th April 1905. Mem Geol Surv India.
38:1409.
Monalisa. 2009. Recent seismic activity in the NW Himalayan fold and thrust belt, Pakistan:
focal mechanism solution and its tectonic implications. Geological Society, London,
Special Publications. 316:259267.
Mukhopadhyay B, Acharyya A and Dasgupta S. 2011a. Potential source zones for Himalayan
earthquake: constraints from spatial-temporal clusters. Nat Hazards. 57:369383.
Mukhopadhyay B, Acharyya A, Bhattacharyya D, Dasgupta S, Pande P. 2011b. Seismot-
ectonics at the terminal ends of the Himalayan Arc. Geomat Nat Hazards Risk. 2
(2):159181.
Naqvi SM. 2005. Geology and evolution of the Indian plate: from hadean to holocene. New
Delhi: Capital Publishing Company.
Newall DJF. 1854. Sketch of mahomedan history of Kashmir. J Asiatic Soc Bengal. 23:409
460.
Oldham T. 1882. A catalogue of Indian earthquakes from the earliest time to the end of A.D.
1869. Memoir Geol Surv India. 19:163215.
Owen LA, Kamp U, Khattak GA, Harp EL, Keefer DK, Bauer MA. 2008. Landslides trig-
gered by the 8 October 2005 Kashmir earthquake. Geomorphology. 94:19.
Pande P, Joshi DD, Kandpal GC, Joshi KC, Singh RJ, Singh BK, Singh J, John B, Sanwal R,
Ram S, et al. 2006. A geoseismological report on 8th october 2005 Kashmir earth-
quake. Geological Survey of India. p. 143.
Park S, Mackie R. 1997. Crustal structures at Nanga Parbat, Northern Pakistan, from
magnetotelluric soundings. Geophys Res Lett. 24:24152418.
Park S, Mackie R. 2000. Resistive (dry?) lower crust in an active orogen, Nanga Parbat,
Northern Pakistan. Tectonophysics. 316:359380.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

Parsons T, Yeats RS, Yagi Y, Hussain A. 2006. Static stress change from the 8 october,
2005 M = 7.6 Kashmir earthquake. Geophysical Res Lett. 33:L06304.
Pegler G, Das S. 1998. An enhanced image of Pamir-Hindu Kusk seismic zone from relocated
earthquake hypocenters. Geophys J Int. 134:573595.
Poretti G, Calligaris C, Tariq S, Khan H. 2010. Comaparison between the tectonic movements
of Mt. Everest and the Nanga Parbat Haramosh Massif. J Nepal Geol Soc. 41:4546.
Prinsep J. 1836. Table LXXV (page 149) in useful tables forming an appendix to the Journal of
Asiatic Society of Bengal. Calcutta: Bishops College Press; p. 187.
Quittmeyer RC, Jacob KH. 1979. Historical and Modern Seismicity of Pakistan, Afghanistan,
Northwestern India, and Southeastern Iran. Bull Seismological Soc Am. 69(3):773
823.
Rai DC, Murty CVR. 2006. Effects of the 2005 Muzaffarabad (Kashmir) earthquake on built
environment. Curr Sci. 90:10661070.
Sarmah SK. 1999. The probability of occurrence of a high magnitude earthquake in Northeast
India. J Geophys. 20(3):129135.
Scordilis EM. 2006. Empirical global relations converting M
S
and m
b
to moment magnitude.
J Seismol. 10:225236.
Seeber L, Armbruster JG, Quittmeyer R. 1981. Seismicity and continental subduction in the
Himalayan Arc. In: Gupta HK, Delany FM, editors. Zagros, Hindu Kush, Himalaya
Geodynamic Evolution. Washington, DC: American Geographical Union; p. 215
242, Geodynamics Series, Vol. 4.
Seeber L, Pecher A. 1998. Strain partitioning along the Himalayan arc and Nanga Parbat anti-
form. Geology. 26:791794.
Shanker D, Yadav RBS, Singh HN. 2007. On the seismic risk in the Hindukush-Pamir-Hima-
laya and their vicinity. Curr Sci. 92(11):16251630.
Shanker D, Sharma ML. 1998. Estimation of seismic hazard parameters for the Himalayas
and its vicinity from complete data les. Pure Appl Geophys. 152(2):267279.
Smith WD. 1986. Evidence for precursory changes in the frequency-magnitude b value.
Geophys J Royal Astro Soc. 86:815838.
Szeliga W, Martin S, Hough S, Bilham R. 2010. Intensity, magnitude, location and attenua-
tion in India for felt earthquakes since 1762. Bull Seismol Soc Am. 100(2):570584.
Tiwari VM, Rajasekhar RP, Mishra DC. 2009. Gravity anomaly, lithospheric structure and
seismicity of Western Himalayan syntaxis. J Seismol. 13:363370.
Urbancic TI, Trifu CI, Long JM, Young RP. 1992. Space-time correlation of b values with
stress release. Pure Appl Geophys, 139, pp. 449462.
Ustu T. 1965. A method in determining the value of b in a formula log N = a - bM showing the
magnitude frequency for earthquakes. Geophys Bull Hokkaido Univ. 13:99103.
Vigne GT. 1844. Travels in Kashmir, Ladak and Iskardo, the Countries adjoining the
mountain course of the Indus, and the Himalaya, North of Panjab, with map. Vol. 1,
2nd ed. London: H. Colburn; p. 406.
Vyas M, Nath SK, Pal I, Sengupta P, Mohanty WK. 2005. GSHAP revisited for the prediction
of maximum credible earthquake in the Sikkim region, India. Acta Geophysica Polon-
ica. 53(2):143152.
Wiemer S, Wyss M. 2000. Minimum magnitude of completeness in earthquake catalogs:
examples from Alaska, the Western United States, and Japan. Bull Seism Soc Am.
90(4):859869.
Wynne AB. 1878. Notes on the earthquake in Punjab of march 2nd 1878. J Asiatic Soc Bengal,
47(2):131140.
Yadav RBS, Bayrak Y, Tripathi JN, Chopra S and Bayrak E. 2012. Regional variation of the
v-upper bound magnitude of GIII distribution in Hindukush-Pamir Himalaya and the
adjacent regions: a perspective on earthquake hazard. Tectonophysics. 544545:112.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

Yadav RBS, Tripathi JN, Shanker D, Rastogi BK, Das MC, Kumar V. 2011. Probabilities for
the occurrences of medium to large earthquakes in northeast India and adjoining
region. Nat Hazards. 56:145167.
Zeitler PK, Chamberlain CP. 2001. Petrogenetic and tectonic signicance of young leucogran-
ites from NW Himalaya, Pakistan. Tectonics. 10:729741.
Zeitler PK, Koons PO, Bishop MP, Chamberlain CP, Craw D, Edwards M A, Hamidullah S,
Jan MQ, Khan MA, Khattak UK, et al. 2001. Crustal reworking at Nanga Partbat,
Pakistan: metamorphic consequences of thermalmechanical coupling facilitated by
erosion. Tectonics. 20:712728.
Appendix I
We consider a stochastic process F(m,t) of a random variable m (say earthquake magnitude)
on a time scale t. It is not always necessary to have an accurate knowledge of F(m,t); rather
important is the largest (or smallest) values of variable m that can occur in a given period.
Thus if m be the magnitude of different earthquake events in a given seismic region, M could
be the maximum magnitude that can occur within a given time interval. The variable M, the
extreme value, then denes a regular point process embedded in the original process F(m,t).
The original theory of extreme value statistics was developed by Gumbel (1958) primarily
for ood forecasting. The probable maximum magnitude M in a given seismic region over a
time period t with exactly zero special events in excess of m is expressed as
P[M _ m[ = P[N = 0[ = exp(P(m)a t); (1)
where a is the mean number of earthquakes per year above magnitude zero.
With probability P(m) = 1 F(m) and t = 1 year, expression (1) becomes
P(m) = exp[a(1 F(m))[: (2)
Now, we assume a homogeneous earthquake process with a cumulative probability
density function represented by the negative exponential distribution for large earth-
quakes (where b is a constant)
F(m) = 1 exp(b m): (3)
Combining equations (2) and (3), we have
P(m) = exp[a exp(bm)[: (4)
Relation (4) is known as the Gumbels Type I distribution of extremes and can be
rewritten as
ln(P(m)) = a exp(b m)
or
ln[ ln(P(m))[ = b m ln a: (5)
The left-hand term in equation (5) is the reduced variate R. This R is of special inter-
est in Hazard studies in the Gumbels Type III distribution because it considers an
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

upper limit of extreme m
P
III
(m) = exp[(M m)=(M u)
q
[; (6)
where M is the upper limit of extremal M, q and u are parameters of the corre-
sponding asymptotic distribution estimated by the method least square.
We suppose that M
1
, M
2
,. . .,M
n
be the largest observed magnitude in a given region dur-
ing N successive time interval t (in years). The different M
max
are arranged in increasing order
of magnitude with rank j = 1, 2, 3,. . ., N and
P
j
(plotting position o j
th
observation) = J=(N 1); (7)
where N is the number of equal intervals. The probability function can be traced
onGambel extreme probability paper by plotting Mj = (j = 1,2,. . ., n) versus plotting
position Pj. For linear graph paper Mj is plotted against reduced variate R, i.e. ln
(ln Pj) (see equation (5)).
The mean return period of extremal M may be obtained for values equal to or exceeding M
as
T(return period) = (1 Pj
1=t
)
1
or
Pj = (1 1=T)
t
; (8)
where t is reference time interval considered. This relation is used to derive M
max
for
a given return period T.
D
o
w
n
l
o
a
d
e
d

b
y

[
B
a
s
a
b

M
u
k
h
o
p
a
d
h
y
a
y
]

a
t

0
7
:
1
9

1
1

O
c
t
o
b
e
r

2
0
1
3

2013 GNHR Kashmir Kangra 2013

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

2013 GNHR Kashmir Kangra 2013

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

This article was downloaded by: [Basab Mukhopadhyay]

On: 11 October 2013, At: 07:19

E) for the period of 15012010 has been compiled with

E direction and extending between Balakot and Bagh. In

) slopes comprising Precambrian and

) lower slopes of uvially undercut

E) with relocated hypocentral data and pointed out that

block with 0.5

overlapping both along latitude and longitude are selected;

blocks plotted at the centre of each block and contoured.

You might also like