Bureau of Reclamation to dismantle quake sensor network




JACKSON, Wyo. (AP) - The U.S. Bureau of Reclamation has decided to dismantle a system of quake sensors along the Teton Range.


Bureau officials say the system, at $100,000 per year, is too expensive to maintain and is yielding no new scientific data.




"If it were to break down tomorrow, no one would repair it," said Stuart Stanger, the bureau's department area manager.




The agency plans to begin dismantling the network's sensors during the next fiscal year, probably during the spring of 2003.




Geologists want the network to stay in place, saying it provides important information about seismic activity along the Teton Fault.




Bob Smith, a University of Utah professor of geophysics and head of the Yellowstone Seismic Network, has been warning his friends and colleagues about the impending end of the system.




"This is a critical area that needs to be monitored," he said. "I'd like to see a partnership with BuRec, the state, the county and the National Park Service. It's time for these agencies to step up and develop these partnerships."




The seismic network was established in 1986 to determine if a project to reconstruct Jackson Lake Dam was adequate.




Diana Cross, a bureau spokeswoman in Boise, Idaho, said the network detects movement so minute that the information has no relevance to the study of the dam.




Jim Case, head hazards geologist for the Wyoming Geologic Survey, said information about small movement is valuable.




"Since the Teton Fault has been so quiet in 16 years, that to us raises a red flag," he said. "If any activity does initiate, it may be of significance. There could be an earthquake that could perhaps exceed design specs" of the dam.




Case wants the state to be notified when the bureau develops concrete plans for dismantling the network.




"Our thought is since BuRec has the network there, they still have the responsibility to maintain it since the dam is still there," he said.




"Until you can adequately model what will happen, you keep the network in. That is apparently something they are not willing to embrace."




Cross agreed that more data is better and maintaining the network will only help science, but said that is not cost effective for the bureau.




"If someone wants to take over it, that would be great," she said.