Annotated Bibliography and References

Draft December 2002

This is a selected list of references collected during the various project stages. Bibliographic references in other Landslides Project documents refer to this combined list of references, some of which have annotations. It is a work in progress and not edited or verified for publication, but for the benefit of researchers working on this topic, early drafts are provided here. We will continuously update this document throughout the project. If you have suggestions, such as additions or corrections to this list, please inform the project staff. Details about the project and contact information are on the project web site at http://www.planning.org/Landslides.

Alsech, Daniel and James Holly. 2002.  When Disasters and Small Businesses Collide. in Natural Hazards Observer. Vol. XXVI, No. 5.

Alesch, Daniel, James Holly, Eliott Mittler, and Robert Nagy. 2002. Organizations at Risk: What happens when Small Businesses and Not-for Profits Encounter Natural Disasters. Fairfax, Virginia: Public Entity Risk Institute (PERI). Available: http://www.riskinstitute.org. Last accessed: December 11, 2002.

American Society of Civil Engineers and The Institute for Business and Home Safety. 2001. The Ten Most Wanted: A Search for Solutions to Reduce Recurring Losses from Natural Hazards. Tampa, Florida: Institute for Business and Home Safety.

Anderson, M.E. and D.R. Clark. 1989. Geological Engineering Evaluation for the Proposed Development within the Preservation Area, Sixth Avenue West Estates. Filing No. 11. Jefferson County, Colorado.

Anderson, M.E., E.R. West. 1990. Addendum to Geological Engineering Evaluation for the Proposed Development Within the Preservation Area, Sixth Avenue West Estates. Filing No. 11, Jefferson County, Colorado.

Atwood, Genevieve. 1994.  Thistle in Utah History Encyclopedia, Allan Kent Powell, ed. 1994. Salt Lake City: University of Utah Press. Also available: http://www.media.utah.edu/UHE/t/THISTLE.html. Last Accessed: May 16, 2002

Bailey, Robert G. 1971. Landslide Hazards Relation to Land Use Planning in Teton National Forest, Northwest Wyoming. Washington: D.C.: US Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

Bailey, Robert G. 1995. Description of the Ecoregions of the United States. Second Edition. Misc. Publication No. 1391 Washington: D.C.: US Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

Bailey, Robert G. Ecoregions Map of North America. Revised 1997. Washington: D.C.: US Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

Bailey, Robert G. 1998.  Ecoregions Map of North America: Explanatory Note . Washington: D.C.: US Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

Bailey, Robert G. 2002.  Ecoregions in The Physical Geography of North America, Antony R. Orme, ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Bailey, Robert G., Peter E. Avers, Thomas King and W. Henry McNab eds. 1994. Ecoregions and Subregions of the United States. Washington: D.C.: US Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

Bailey, Robert G. and W. Henry McNab. 1994. Map Unit Descriptions of Subregions (Sections) of the United States: A Table to Supplement the Map of ecoreions and Subregions of the United States. Washington: D.C.: US Department of Agriculture Forest Service.

Baum, Rex L., Alan F. Chleborad, and Robert L. Schuster. 1998.  Landslides Triggered by the Winter 1996-97 Storms in the Puget Lowland, Washington. Denver, CO: USGS, Open File Report 98-239. Available: http://geohazards.cr.usgs.gov/pubs/ofr/ofr98-239/ofr98-239.html. Last accessed: May 7, 2002.

Bell, Brenda. 1999.  The Liquid Earth in The Atlantic Monthly. January, 53-72.

This reference is an example of a general interest popular magazine reporting about landslide hazards. Although the article is primarily anecdotal, it nevertheless covers some of the key issues local communities face. Some of the scientific descriptions of mudflows are particularly lucid and simple in a style that non-geologists can understand. Examples mentioned in the article cover all regions of the country and explain the underlying geologic processes. It is also available online at http://www.theatlantic.com/issues/99jan/mudslide.htm.

Bernknopf, Richard L., David S. Brookshire, David R. Soller, Michael J. McKee, John F. Sutter, Jonathan C. Matti, and Russel H. Campbell. 1993. Societal Value of Geological Maps. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1111 (Second Printing 1996).

It describes a method for estimating the economic value of applying geologic map information to land-use decision-making. Both empirical and case study data are employed in making the case for geologic maps. Using Loudoun County, Virginia, as a case study area, the study shows the net benefit of using geologic maps is between $1.28 million and $3.50 million. The methodology describes the use of geologic maps for two issues: waste disposal (siting a county landfill) and transportation corridor (selecting a road alignment for the Washington Bypass). In both instances, the study showed the mitigation costs of geological failures and the amount saved as a result of using geologic maps in both avoiding the areas susceptible to failures and taking mitigation measures (shoring of slopes, for example). Whereas the case study shows how specific applications can justify the cost of preparation of geologic maps, the second chapter makes the argument that scientific data can be employed in regulatory applications using geologic maps where such regulations can be more uniformly and comprehensively evaluated. Because geologic maps serve many other purposes besides their use in public policy and regulations, their economic value makes it a prime candidate for private sector producers of such information. The last chapter evaluates the pros and cons of public versus private production of such information, and provides a methodology to survey the economic benefits of geologic maps,taking into consideration the value of public good, natural monopoly and supply, free-rider issues, cost recovery, vertical integration, network externalities, quality, and the value of unbiased information.

Bernknopf, R.L., R.H. Campbell, D.S. Brookshire, and C.D. Sahpiro. 1988. A Probabilistic Approach to Landslide Hazard Mapping in Cincinnati, Ohio, with Applications for Economic Evaluation. Bulletin of the Association of Engineering Geologists, Vol. 25, No. 1.

Blake, T.F., R.A. Hollingsworth, J.P. Stewart, R. D Antonio, J. Earnest, F. Gharib, L. Horsman, D. Hsu, S. Kupferman, R. Masuda, D. Pradel, C. Real, W. Reeder, N. Sathialingam, and E. Simantob. 2002. Recommended Procedures for Implementation of DMG Special Publication 117 Guidelines for Analyzing and Mitigating Landslide Hazards in California. Los Angeles, California: Southern California Earthquake Center.

Blair-Tyler, Martha. 1994. Look Before You Build: Geological Studies for Safer Land Development in the San Francisco Bay Area. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Geological Survey Circular 1130.

The central message of this USGS Public Issues in Earth Science circular is the need for geologic studies before developing any land. We know that geologic hazards lurk in all parts of the country. No area is immune to their effects. Yet development happens without understanding these risks. For most areas, a study may appear unnecessary and even unduly burdensome, especially given that decades may pass before a disaster, n the form of an earthquake or a landslide, strikes. Moreover, the costs of a study under general accounting principles appear as an expenditure item with no comparable item in the income column. The benefits, if any, are long term and uncertain at best. But the arguments put forth in this report tackle these issues at various levels. It describes the role of geologic information in pre-design, reconnaissance, study phase, peer review, monitoring and inspection, maintenance, and review of project modifications. Some of the details about maps scales and how they may underestimate the risk levels may be particularly helpful to planners. The descriptions for the professional titles, including geologist, engineering geologist, and geotechnical engineer, lay out the differences that are worth noting when using these terms in local regulations. Examples of using geology information in project review rounds out this report. The examples cover small and large size communities, development of hillsides, annexations, redevelopment, bayshore and delta areas, and hazardous areas.

Blair, Martha L., Thomas C. Vlassic, William R. Cotton, and William Fowler. 1985. When the Ground Fails. Program on Environment and Behavior Monograph #40. Boulder, Colorado: University of Colorado, Institute of Behavioral Science.

National Science Foundation, under the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, funded this report, which consists of two case studies of public agencies responding to debris flows. The primary purpose of the report was to assess the response to the disaster, and the secondary purpose was to observe the effectiveness of FEMA procedures about hazard mitigation. The two small, unincorporated communities, Inverness, in Marin County, and Love Creek, in Santa Cruz County, both located in the Bay Area of California, were the chosen study areas. A conclusions and recommendations chapter summarizes the main problems under three separate headings: Post-disaster Geotechnical Evaluation, Hazard Mitigation as Part of Recovery, and Effectiveness of Recovery. Each of these sections contains several important findings that can be useful even today for local planning agencies. Although some of the problems have since been addressed in FEMA and other state and local response procedures, it is still worth noting that many of the long-term solutions recommended here have yet to be addressed.

Brabb, E.E., G.F. Wieczorek, and E.L. Harp. 1989. Map showing 1983 landslides in Utah Map, MF-2085. Washington, D.C.: U.S. Geological Survey.

Bray and Rathje. 1998.  Earthquake-induced displacements of solid-waste landfills. Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering. New York, New York: American Society of Civil Engineers, Vol. 120, No. 1, pp. 242-253.

Brindle, D. 1998.  Memo to Frank Hutlfess, Jefferson County Attorney, July 17, 1997. (memo incorrectly dated 1997)

Brooks vs. Leprino. 1998.  Compliant and Jury Demand, Case No. 98CV1881. District Court, County of Jefferson, State of Colorado.

Burby, Raymond J. ed. 1998. Cooperating with Nature Confronting Natural Hazards With Land-use Planning for Sustainable Communities. Washington, D.C. Joseph Henry Press.

Burton, Ian, Robert W. Kates and Gilbert F. White. 1993. The Environment as Hazard, 2^nd edition. New York: The Guilford Press.

First published in 1978, this influential volume has spurred many a research program in natural hazards in academia, government, and the private sector. It has altered planners view of the environment to include the destructive nature of extreme events. Initially funded through a National Science Foundation grant, this volume explores hazards as experienced, i.e., impacts on individuals and groups, and how they respond. Both in individual choice and collective action, the research findings show a range of experiences between the rich and poor, between local and national policies, between national and international actions, and the emerging realization of the cumulative impacts on a global scale.

Chleborad, Alan and Rex Baum. 1999.  Selected Landslides from the December 27-29, 1998 Storm, Western Washington and Oregon, USGS website. Available: http://landslides.usgs.gov/Wash-Or/table.html. Last accessed: May 17, 2002.

Chowdhury, R.N., and W.H. Tang. 1987. Comparison of Risk Models for Slopes. In Proc., Fifth International Conference on Applications of Statistics and Probability in Soil and Structural Engineering, Vancouver, Canada.

Cincinnati, City of. 1975. Hillside Development Guidelines. Cincinnati, Ohio: The Cincinnati Institute.

Prepared for the Cincinnati City Planning Commission by The Cincinnati Institute, the 49 guidelines provide applicants for development permits with a checklist of submission materials that may be required for development reviews. The checklist is in the form of questions that reviewers consider in the evaluation process. The applicants provide visual and written material to answer them. For example, one question asks: What is the degree of visibility of the project? To answer this, the guidelines offer what are called  basic hillside themes that illustrate elements of the environment, much as Kevin Lynch s scheme. One theme illustrates how the hillsides operate as city walls and which aspects of this wall serve to accentuate the effect of a city being enclosed. Another theme deals with slopes and how the vertical and horizontal alignments of structures on slopes can retain the hill s profile. The in/out theme highlights the function of contours, open vistas, and views serve as markers for moving in and out of spaces walled by the hills. The last two themes deal with orientation, landmarks, streetscape, and natural features, such as geology, earth moving, and related topics. Each of these themes shapes one or more of the 49 guidelines, which appear at the end of the report in an indexed list.

Cincinnati Post Staff. May 26^th, 1998.  Now that Holiday is Over, the Sun Shows Up, in The Cincinnati Post, Cincinnati, Ohio. Available: http://www.cincypost.com/news/1998/weath052698.html. Last accessed: May 17, 2002.

Clark, Michael D. May 25^th, 1998.  Mudslide Chokes Columbia Parkway: Artery Should Reopen by Tuesday Morning,  in The Cincinnati Post, Cincinnati, Ohio. Available: http://www.cincypost.com/news/1998/storm052598.html. Last accessed: May 17, 2002.

Coe, J.A., J.A. Michael, R.A. Crovelli, and W.Z. Savage. 2000. Preliminary Map Showing Landslide Densities, Mean Recurrence Intervals, and Exceedance Probabilities as Determined From Historic Records, Seattle, Washington, U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Geological Survey Open-file Report 00-303. Available: http://geohazards.cr.usgs.gov

Coe, Jeff. 1997.  Global Positioning System Monitoring of Unstable Slopes Along the Interstate-70 Corridor, Central Colorado. Available: http://landslides.usgs.gov/html_files/landslides/oueb2/landslide.htm. Last accessed: May 22, 2002.

Cohn, Timothy A., Kathleen K. Gohn and William H. Hooke, eds. 2001. Lessons from PPP2000: Living with Earth s Extremes. Tampa, FL: Institute for Business and Home Safety.

Comerio, Mary C. 1998. Disaster Hits Home: New Policy on Urban Housing Recovery. Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.

Committee on Ground Failure Hazards. 1985. Reducing Losses From Landslides in the United States. Commission on Engineering and Technical Systems, National Research Council, Washington, D.C.

Compare, Lisa Del. 1992.  Reducing Earthquake Hazards in the Central U.S.: Education of Architects and Engineers. Champaign: University of Illinois.

Costa, J.E., and Robert L. Schuster. 1988. The Formation and Failure of Natural Dams. Geological Society of America Bulletin, vol. 100.

Crandell, D.R., C.D. Miller, H.X. Glicken, R.L Christiansen, and C.G. Newhall. 1984. Catastrophic Debris Avalanche From Ancestral Shasta Volcano, California, Geology, vol. 12.

Crandell, D.R. 1971. Postglacial Lahars From Mount Rainier Volcano, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 677.

Cruden, David M., 1991.  A Simple Definition of a Landslide. Bulletin of the International Association of Engineering Geology, No. 43, pp. 27-29.

Cruden, David M., and David J. Varnes. 1996.  Landslide Types and Processes in Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Turner, A. Keith, Robert L. Schuster, eds. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Special Report 247. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Dietrich, W.E., D. Bellugi, and R. Real de Asua, 2001.  Validation of the Shallow Landslide Model, SHALSTAB, for Forest Management, in Land Use and Watersheds: Human Influence on Hydrology and Geomorphology in Urban and Forest Areas. American Geoph. Union, Water Science and Application 2, p.195-227.

El Nino Response Group (USGS). 1998.  Slope Failure and Shoreline Retreat During Northern California s Latest El Nino. Geographical Society of America: GSA Today, Vol. 8, No. 8.

Surface processes accelerated by severe storms during the 1997-1998 El Nino event scoured hillsides and damaged property across coastal California. Technological advances such as digital mapping, exemplified here for the San Francisco Bay area but applicable elsewhere, have enabled government agencies to better describe, monitor, and predict the effects of shoreline and slope failure.

Einstein, H.H. 1988.  Landslide Risk Assessment Procedure. In Proc., Fifth International Symposium on Landslides, Lausanne, Switzerland, A.A. Balkema, Rotterdam, Netherlands, Vol. 2.

Erley, Duncan, and William J. Kockelman. 1981. Reducing Landslide Hazards: A Guide for Planners. Chicago, Illinois: American Planning Association, Planning Advisory Service Report No. 359.

Jointly sponsored by USGS and US Environmental Protection Agency, this is the American Planning Association s first report on landslide hazards for planners. It covers introductory geologic information about earth surface processes that cause landslides and illustrates a cartographic method to map such risks. The section on soil survey maps discusses how they can serve as an interim method for identifying potential risk areas. The grading section shows the provisions of the Uniform Building Code, published by the International Conference of Building Officials, that local governments can adopt as a grading ordinance. The other option is to require a detailed soil survey with an evaluation of the development proposal s impacts on the stability and surface conditions. Fairfax County, Virginia, and many such large counties that have a variety of soil and slope types often rely on this method instead of a grading ordinance. The last chapter briefly outlines other approaches to reducing landslide hazards: discouraging development in hazard areas, using police power to regulate high-risk areas, protecting existing development, and removing existing development from known hazard areas.

Eversoll, Duane A. 1991. Landslide Inventory Along Nebraska State-Federal Roadway System: Supplemntal Agreement V Between Bebraska Department of Roads and The University of Nebraska. Lincoln, Nebraska: Conservation and Survey Division Institute of Agriculture and Natural resources University of Nebraska-Lincoln.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1999 (Rev Feb 2000). Guidelines for Determining Flood Hazards on Alluvial Fans. Washington, D.C.: FEMA

Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1997. Multi-Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment: A Cornerstone of the National Mitigation Strategy. Washington, D.C.: FEMA Mitigation Directorate.

For hazard identification and risk assessment for natural and technological hazards in the United States, this is the primary reference. Prepared by FEMA s mitigation directorate, this report provides a summary of the risks and information about disaster resources. It is organized by hazards (atmospheric, geologic, hydrologic, seismic, etc.) and landslides are covered as a separate chapter even though they occur in earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, rainstorms, and other disaster types. In other words, landslides are underestimated because they are attributed to the event that triggers it. The focus of the chapter is on mitigation and loss reduction through proper planning and risk assessment. The other discussions and sections mirror recommendations from sources listed in this bibliography.

Federal Emergency Management Agency. 1990. Post-Disaster Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance for State and Local Governments. Washington, D.C.: FEMA

Fleming, R.W. and F.A. Taylor. 1980.  Estimating the Costs of Landslide Damage in the United States. U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Geological Survey Circular 832.

Freedman, Jane L., Editor. 1977. Lots of Danger: Property Buyer s Guide to Land Hazards of Southwestern Pennsylvania. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: Pittsburgh Geological Society, Inc.

The Landslides chapter, written by Louis Heyman and Jesse L. Craft, outlines the risks of landslides for homebuyer, builder, and homeowners of this region. Although written for the general public, this 23-page summary covers all aspects of landslide issues with information about the geology, risks, history of incidents in the region, and the 14 tell tale signs of a landslide are excellent pointers for homeowners.

Godschalk, David R., Timothy Beatley, Philip Berke, David J. Brower, Edward J. Kaiser, Charles C. Bohl, and R. Matthew Goebel. 1999. Natural Hazard Mitigation; Recasting Disaster Policy and Planning. Washington, D.C.: Island Press.

This work is probably the most comprehensive recent evaluation of US hazard mitigation policy under the 1988 Stafford Act. Funded by the National Science Foundation, the authors also investigate ethical issues in natural hazard management. Although landslide hazards are not specifically dealt with as part of the six case studies, the lessons from mitigation in action as put forth by the authors are nevertheless pertinent. First, the policy framework concerning mitigation, preparedness, response, and recovery work is sound but the implementation, especially for mitigation, has been uneven. Second, plans prepared by states for hazard mitigation, a necessary component for eligibility for mitigation grants, do not meet their full potential. The authors found plans were prepared to meet the pro forma requirements to qualify for federal grants, but are generally of poor quality. Third, grant programs, such as the one authorized under the Stafford Act, may be well intentioned but promoted scattered spending, created resource mismatches, added more review processes, and ultimately delayed spending obligated funds. Fourth, ethical quandaries faced by individuals, groups, and institutions in mitigation decisions are just as complex as the disasters. Though the analysis of current values is worthwhile, the authors provide even more important advice: a 25-point guideline for ethical mitigation.

Godschalk, David R., Edward J. Kaiser, and Philip Burke. 1999. Integrating Hazard Mitigation and Local Land Use Planning in Modernizing State Planning Statutes: The Growing Smart Working Papers Vol 2. Chicago, Illinois: American Planning Association, Planning Advisory Service Report No. 480/481. pp 57-81.

Although not directly related to landslide hazards, this chapter makes the case for linking the two forward-looking activities related to hazards: mitigation and planning. The central thesis of this work is that mitigation and land-use planning rest on three values: social, market, and ecological. To ensure sustainability, any plan will have to weigh the three values equally and not tilt in one direction at the expense of the other two. The section on an integrated approach to hazard mitigation in a comprehensive community land-use planning process shows how to balance the three values. The last section on assessing plan quality is especially pertinent to evaluating mitigation plans for landslide hazards.

Godt, Jonathan W. 1999.  Maps showing locations of damaging landslides caused by El Nio rainstorms, winter season 1997-98, San Francisco Bay region, California. Denver, Colorado: USGS.

Gori, Paula L. ed. 1993. Applications of Research from the U.S. Geological Survey Program, Assessment of Regional Earthquake Hazards and Risk Along the Wasatch Front, Utah. USGS Professional Paper 1519, Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey.

A thorough case study of papers from numerous authors on how earthquake hazard information was transferred from scientific, technical understanding of geologists to public officials, land-use planners, emergency managers, and others who can implement hazard mitigation steps as part of their profession. The papers outline how policy and practice among the various professions incorporated hazard information about surface fault rupture, landslides and debris flows, liquefaction, and tectonic subsidence in the Wasatch Front area.

Gori, Paula L. 199(?).  Earthquake Hazards Mitigation: An Idea That s Time Has Come. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey.

Gori, Paula L., and William C. Burton. 1996. Debris-Flow Hazards in the Blue Ridge of Virginia. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 159-96.

Fast moving landslides rival snow avalanches in speed and magnitude. After a rainstorm in June 1995 in Madison County, Virginia, a series of mudslides on the steep hillsides of the Blue Ridge coalesced into massive debris flows that inundated the valleys. In the process, the mudflows uprooted trees, boulders, homes, and everything else in their paths. Some of the flows traveled up to two miles with speeds reaching 20 miles per hour. One result of this study is a debris-flow map that also shows the location of landslides, flooding, and damage areas derived from aerial photography, field investigations, and radar observations from the National Weather Service. The  What You Can Do If You Live Near Steep Hills section has a check list of things to do during and prior to intense storms.

Gori, Paula L., Carolyn L. Dreidger, and Sharon L. Randall. 1999. Seattle Area Natural Hazards Project: Learning to Live with Geology and Hydrologic Hazards. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, Water-Resources Investigations Report 99-4182.

This four-page report summarizes the 1997 USGS s five-year project to provide GIS maps of natural hazards, such as landslides, earthquakes, volcanoes, floods, and tsunamis to local communities in the Seattle region. The maps are designed to give multi-hazard GIS information over the Internet so local planning efforts can incorporate scientific understanding of hazards into policy and regulatory initiatives. Results of this cooperation from USGS, local, and state agencies are in the online maps at http://seattlehazards.usgs.gov/ offering multi-hazard maps and an impressive set of interactive maps

Godt, Jonathan W., Lynn M. Highland, and William Z. Savage. 1997. El Nino and the National Landslide Hazard Outlook for 1997-1998. Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 180-97.

The maps included in this fact sheet show the precipitation outlook alongside the landslide susceptibility for the 48 states. Precipitation is shown, on one map as contours of the probability that a given area will experience precipitation above or below the normal. On another map, both landslide incidence and landslide susceptibility are shown as a composite. Precipitation data were based on NOAA National Climate Outlook Maps and the incidence locations are a function of the number of incidents in a given area. Since this is a highly generalized map for a large area showing broad regions of the US, it is not intended for local planning or site selection.

Gordon, Steven I. And Robert D. Klousner, Jr. 1986.  Using Landslide Hazard Information in Planning: An Evaluation of Three Methods. Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 52, No. 4, pp. 431-442.

The article reviews three methods of assessing landslide hazards. The authors point out the importance of taking into consideration landslides that have occurred in an area previously when determining site suitability.

H. John Heinz III Center for Science, Economics and the Environment. 2000. The Hidden Costs of Coastal hazards: Implications for Risk Assessment and Mitigation. Washington D.C.: Island Press.

Haneberg, William C. 2001.  Probabilistic Methods Provide New Tools for Landslide Hazard Mapping in Earth Observation Magazine. December 2001. pp 10-12.

Rational probabilistic models present an alternative to multiple-scenario analysis or qualitative methods for landslide hazard mapping.

Haneberg, William C., Mary M. Riestenberg, Richard E. Pohana, and Sharon C. Diekmeyer. 1992.  Cincinnati s Geologic Environment: A Trip for Secondary-School Science Teachers. Prepared for the 1992 Annual Meeting of the Geological Society of America. Available: http://www.rcc.org/transeng/colbpky1.pdf and http://www.rcc.org/transeng/colbpky2.pdf. Last accessed: May 17, 2002.

Hansen, Michael C. 1995. Landslides in Ohio. Ohio Department of Natural Resources - Division of Geological Survey, Geofacts No. 8.

Hartness, Nievita Bueno. 2001.  1964 Good Friday Great Alaskan Earthquake Liquefaction and Landslides. Available: http://www.geo.arizona.edu/~/nhartnes/alaska/land.html. Last accessed: May 16, 2002.

Highland, Lynn M., Jonathan W. Godt, David Howell, and William Z. Savage. 1998. El Nino 1997-98: Damaging Landslides in the San Francisco Bay Area. Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 089-98.

This landslide damage reconnaissance illustrated a key property of rain-induced landslides: prolonged rainfall triggers deep-seated, slow-moving landslides, whereas a sudden storm or deluge causes debris flows. This difference was noticed in the San Francisco Bay Area s major landslide events of the 1982 storm and the 1997-98 El Nino-driven rainfall. In both events, the damage was extensive, not just in monetary terms, but also in the disruption of lifelines, such as water, sewer, and power.

Highland, Lynn M., Stephenson D. Ellen, Sarah B. Christian, and William M. Brown III. 1997. Debris-Flow Hazards in the United States. Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 176-97.

This fact sheet is a concise overview of debris-flow hazards, which primarily occur in two forms: slow moving and fast moving. They may start in swales on steep slopes, but as they flow down slope, multiple small flows may combine, much like river tributaries, to form larger channels with enormous momentum and potential for damage. Intense rainfall or rapid snowmelts are the primary triggers, although wildfires in combination with surface runoff from normal rains are also known causes. Even slopes along culverts and roadways where surface runoff is channeled can trigger mudslides, albeit on a small scale. On the other end of the scale, volcanic eruptions cause the most destructive debris flows. For each of these types of debris flows, the USGS has a variety of monitoring and predicting methodologies in place.

Hillside Trust, The. 1991. A Hillside Protection Strategy for Greater Cincinnati: 1: Overview. Cincinnati, Ohio: The Hillside Trust.

----. 1991. A Hillside Protection Strategy for Greater Cincinnati: II: Identifying Greater Cincinnati's Sensitive Hillsides. Cincinnati, Ohio: The Hillside Trust.

----. 1991. A Hillside Protection Strategy for Greater Cincinnati: III: Development Guidelines for Cincinnati's Hillsides. Cincinnati, Ohio: The Hillside Trust.

The above three volumes together constitute what may perhaps be the best citizens initiated program to deal with landslides as a risk while preserving and protecting hillsides. Cincinnati s environmental quality depends on the quality of the hilly terrain that is intensely developed, visually striking, and environmentally sensitive. The Hillside Trust, which published these three volumes, serves the local governments in the greater Cincinnati area by providing technical information on various aspects of development. The first volume establishes the need to protect forested hillsides and provides a broad strategy for local governments to maintain the visual and geological integrity of the region. The second volume shows the areas most in need of protection from any development, and areas where development may occur provided they happen under specific visual and geotechnical guidelines. The last volume provides guidelines for land-use, zoning ordinances, and development methods. It is an excellent summary of best practices from around the country, which have been tailored to Cincinnati s conditions. Although in reviewing these three volumes, one may not find anything unique per se, except in one respect. It is by far the only approach that takes into consideration both risks and aesthetics. Visual preferences, as described by a visual preference model, set the limits of development. The patterns of development are set by the development susceptibility model. These two models, in conjunction with a landslide susceptibility model and a environmental-ecological model, then feed into a composite macro model that ranks areas (cells) along various scales. If a given cell has a 6 rating, it means high visual sensitivity and high landslide susceptibility. Development guidelines (in the third volume) are keyed to the risk factors as either being fundamental, recommended, or optional. They encompass subdivision regulations, zoning to regulate density and visual character of developments, earthwork regulations, and vegetation and replanting requirements.

Hobblitt, R.P., J.S. Walder, C.C. Driedger, K. M. Scott, P.T. Pringle, and J. W. Vallance. 1998. Volcano Hazards From Mount Rainier, Washington. U.S. Geological Survey Open-file Report 98-0428.

Holtz, Robert H., and Robert L. Schuster. 1996. "Stabilization of Soil Slopes" in Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Turner, A. Keith, Robert L. Schuster, eds. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Special Report 247. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

International Conference of Building Officials. 1985. Uniform Building Code. Whittier, California.

International Geotechnical Societies UNESCO Working Party for World Landslide Inventory. 1993.  Mutilingual Landslide Glossary. Richmond, British Columbia: BiTech Publishers Ltd.

Jaffe, Bruce, Robert Kayen, Helen Gibbons, James W. Hendley II, and Peter H. Stauffer. 1998. Popular Beach Disappears Underwater in Huge Coastal Landslide - Sleeping Bear Dunes, Michigan. Menlo Park, California: U.S. Geological Survey and National Park Service, USGS Fact Sheet-020-98.

This is an example of a massive coastal landslide in 1995 in an area that experienced similar landslides in the past (1914 and 1971). Located on the western coast of Michigan along the northern shores of Lake Michigan, this landslide was attributed to the snowmelt that seeped into the pores, mainly due to a warm winter, increasing the pore pressures and loosening the sand grains holding the bluff together. More than 35 million cubic feet of the bluff disappeared into the lake and the slide deposited trees and debris as far as two miles offshore.

Jaffe, Martin, JoAnn Butler, and Charles Thurow. n.d. Reducing Earthquake Risks: A Planner's Guide. Chicago, Illinois: American Planning Association, Planning Advisory Service Report No. 364.

In the chapter on mapping earthquake hazards, this PAS report discusses the role of landslides in earthquakes and the difficulty in mapping them. Other sections of the report, especially local and federal response to disasters, have portions pertinent to landslide hazards.

Jger, Stefan, and Gerald F. Wieczorek. 1994. Landslide Susceptibility in the Tully Valley Area, Finger Lakes Region, New York. U.S. Geological Survey Open-file Report 94-0615 (On-line version). Available: http://geology.cr.usgs.gov/pub/open-file-reports/ofr-94-0615/tvstudy.htm. Last accessed: May 17, 2002.

Jibson, Randall W. 1992.  The Mameyes, Puerto Rico, landslides disaster of October 7, 1985 in Slosson, et. al. (eds) Landslides/Landslides Mitigation, Geological Society of America: Reviews in Engineering Geology, v. IX, Chapter 5.

Jibson, Randall W., Edwin L.Harp, and John A. Michael. 1998. A Method For Producing Digital Probabilistic Seismic Landslide Hazard Maps: an Example From the Los Angeles, California, Area, U.S. Geological Survey Open-file report 98-113. Available: http://geohazards.cr.usgs.gov

Johnson, Erin J., John W. Himmelreich, Jr. 1998. Geologic Hazards Avoidance Or Mitigation: A Comprehensive Guide to State Statutes, Land Use Issues, and Professional Practice in Colorado, Information Series 47. Denver, Colorado: Colorado Geological Survey.

Like Freedman s (1977) report for Southwestern Pennsylvania, this is a state geological society s initiated report. However, this one is for geologists and engineers primarily and planners and attorneys secondarily. Unlike the Pennsylvania report, this one includes a variety of other subjects, such as land-use statutes, insurance, and professional responsibilities. The Colorado Planned Growth Act appears to be the primary focus of the discussion in the report. The proposed act, which was defeated in a statewide referendum after the publication of this report, mandated local communities to include a geologic hazard element in their comprehensive plans. Although the initiative s defeat was on other grounds (requiring public water and sewer for all subdivisions), the reasons for ensuring landslide hazards risk are sound. Even without this enabling legislation, Colorado s legislative history shows many other provisions for dealing with natural hazards including landslides. The 1974 Land Use Act, according to the report, includes 44 defined terms for natural hazards that clarify the various types of natural hazards and subsequent court challenges have strengthened these definitions as used in enforcing the Act. It goes on to say that other legislative powers derived from consumer protection laws also require disclosure and timely dissemination of information about soil and hazard issues in real estate transactions. In the section on responsibilities of practitioners and professional associations, the report summarizes the definitions of geology and geologist. It also gives a summary of the state geological society s role in assisting state and local governments in addressing natural hazards. Of importance here is the reference to the 1979 CGS Special Publication 6, Guidelines and Criteria for Identification and Land-Use Controls of Geologic Hazard and Mineral Resource Areas, by Rogers, W.P., et al. Excerpts of this report appear in appendix 3 of the Colorado report.

Keaton, Jeffrey R., and Georege H. Beckwith. 1996. "Important Considerations in Slope Design" in Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Turner, A. Keith, Robert L. Schuster, eds. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Special Report 247. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Keaton, Jeffrey R., and Jerome V. DeGraff. 1996. "Surface Observation and Geologic Mapping" in Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Turner, A. Keith, Robert L. Schuster, eds. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Special Report 247. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Kienholz, H. 1992. Risk Assessment in Mountains. In Proc., 1 Simposio Internacional sobre Sensores Remotaos y Sisternas de Informacion Georgafica (SIG) para el Esudio de Riesgos Naturales, Bogot, Colombia, Vol. 2.

MacKinnon, David A. n.d. Section Four: APZ Density Guidelines. Arlington, Virginia: United States Department of Defense.

Mader, George, Thomas C. Vlassic, and Penelope A. Gregory. 1988. Geology and Planning: The Porola Valley Experience. Portola Valley, California: William Spangle and Associates, Inc.

Maine Geological Survey. 1997.  Geologic Site of the Month - September 1997 Aftermath of the 1996 Rockland Landslide. Available: http://www.state.me.us/doc/nrimc/mgs/sites1997/septembr.htm. Last accessed: May 17, 2002.

May, Peter J. and Walter Williams. 1986. Disaster Policy Implementation: Managing Programs under Shared Governance. New York: Plenum Press.

Mills, Evan, Eugene Lecomte and Andrew Peara. 2001. US Insurance Industry Perspectives on Global Climate Change. Berkeley, California: University of California, Berkeley.

Mitchell, James K., ed. 1999. Crucibles of Hazard: Mega-Cities and Disasters in Transition. New York, New York: United Nations University Press.

Morgan, Benjamin A., Gerald F. Wieczorek, and Russel H. Campbell. 1999. Map of Rainfall, Debris Flows, and Flood Effects of the June 27, 1995, Storm in Madison County, Virginia. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, Geologic Investigations Series I-2623-A.

This map is an example of post landslide mapping and provides a good summary for a large area where floods and landslides have occurred. The area is large but even a map at 1:24,000 scale can show discernable patterns of floods and landslides when overlaid by rainfall data.

Morgan, B., G. Wieczorek, and R. Campbell. 1999. Historical and potential debris-flow hazard map of area affected by the June 27, 1995, storm in Madison County, Virginia. U.S. Geological Survey Investigation Series Map I-2623B.

Motyka, S.A., C. J. Nye and M.A. Moorman. 1993. Geothermal Resources of the Aleutian Arc. Alaska Division of Geological and Geophysical Surveys Professional Report 114.

Murck, Barbara Winifred, Brian J. Skinner, Stephen C. Porter. 1997. Dangerous Earth: An Introduction to Geologic Hazards. New York, N.Y.: John Wiley & Sons, INC.

This book contains the first two parts, basic geologic concepts and geologic hazards, of the more comprehensive three-part Environmental Geology by the same authors. The section on landslide hazards is outlined in Part II, Hazardous Geologic Processes, which includes the differences between hazard assessment and risk assessment, prediction and forecast, and the types of roles geologic information plays in an integrated approach to reducing landslide hazards.

Nichols, Donald R., and J. M. Buchanan-Banks. 1974. Seismic Hazards and Land-Use Planning. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, Geological Survey Circular 690, Fourth Printing 1980.

One of the earliest USGS publications to address land-use planning techniques for seismic hazards, this report outlines the nature of the risk in relation to the various levels of land-use planning initiatives. It recognizes not only the activity type associated with a land-use, but also the intensity of development. Furthermore, it mentions specific building code changes (banning parapets for instance) in an abatement ordinance. The emphasis is on establishing a flexible legal and procedural framework to accommodate better modeling and hazard prediction techniques. For landslides, the discussion is particularly informative on how the slope and underlying geology can together trigger major ground failures. The report illustrates a 1974 California quake that had an average slope of no more than 2.5 percent but nevertheless experienced ground failures due to liquefaction. Some of the recommendations for land-use planning are: low intensity uses, giving tax credits for extremely unstable areas, recognizing disruptions to lifelines (water, sewer, power, etc.) that will require costs to be borne by the public at-large, and for known hazard areas that are already developed, implementing a nonconforming ordinance to phase out the uses.

Ohlmacher, Gregory C. 2000.  The Relationship between Geology and Landslide Hazards of Atchison, Kansas and Vicinity. Lawrence, Kansas: Kansas Geological Survey.

Olshansky, Robert B. 1989. Landslide Hazard Reduction: a Need for Greater Government Involvement. New York, New York: Clark Boardman Company, Ltd., Zoning and Planning Law Report Vol. 12, No. 3.

----. 1990. Landslide Hazard in the United States: Case Studies in Planning and Policy Development. New York and London: Garland Publishing, Inc.

If there can be a single source illustrating all the complexities of reducing risk of landslides in the current planning, zoning, and regulatory environment, this book is it. Through five case studies (in California and Utah) including a thorough analysis of the physical, social, and regulatory conditions, it presents an overall picture that any planner would find not just informative, but also be able to comprehend why we still incur losses from landslides. After the initial description of the problem in geologic terms, the author s emphasis is on the complacent attitudes in development decisions that start as taking small risks and end in disasters. This theme runs through all the five case studies. In some, the communities were aware of the risks the developers were taking, yet let them take under the assumption that whatever needs mitigating would be tended to during construction. But in each of these cases, it is apparent that the problem started with lack of adequate public policies to discourage such risk taking in the first place. Even with all the necessary building codes, some of the disasters would not have been avoidable. If one were to overlook the human toll, the economic losses itself would have justified whatever protection was needed, including not building in high-hazard areas. Insurance and disaster aid play a part in alleviating some of these losses. Yet these are increasingly difficult to rely on as the research suggests. Warning signs point in all directions: risk assessment, regulations, insurance, and public attitudes to risk. The last chapter, Analysis and Conclusions, paints a multi-pronged agenda to tackle this problem, everything from short-term strategies to long-term risk avoidance through research and planning.

----. 1996. Planning for Hillside Development. Chicago, Illinois: American Planning Association, Planning Advisory Service Report No. 466.

Hillsides pose unique problems for the construction and maintenance of human settlements. This report describes the importance of planning for hillside development before adopting any particular set of regulations to shape that development. There may be inherent contradictions in multipurpose hillside ordinances that try to deal effectively with safety, aesthetics, environmental preservation, and affordability simultaneously. Based on a survey of 190 local governments in 22 states, the report offers a variety of approaches to achieving a community's specific goals in hillside development. Excerpts from 13 ordinances and one nonprofit association, a series of illustrations, an analysis of the survey, and a bibliography round out the report.

----. 1996.  Financing Landslide Hazard Mitigation in the United States. Journal of Environmental Planning and Management, Vol. 39, No. 3, pp. 371-385.

----. 1998.  Regulation of Hillside Development in the United States. Environmental Management, Vol. 22, No. 3.

----. 1986.  Geologic Hazard Abatement Districts. California Geology. Vol. 39, No. 7, pp. 159.

Olshansky, Robert B., and J. David Rogers. 1987.  Unstable Ground: Landslide Policy in the United States. Ecology Law Quarterly, Vol. 13, No. 4.

Oregon Department of Land Conservation & Development and the Community Planning Workshop. July, 2000.  Landslide Technical Resource Guide in Planning for Natural Hazards. Eugene, Oregon: University of Oregon.

This chapter provides information for Oregon communities who are adding landslide hazard planning to their comprehensive plans. The chapter supplies an overview of the causes and characteristics of landslides, helps communities to identify them, summarizes state laws that involve landslides, and addresses ways to reduce landslide hazard risk. It also uses case studies to exhibit communities that are currently addressing landslides and provides resources for landslide planning in the state.

Palm, Risa I. 1990. Natural Hazards: An Integrative Framework for Research and Planning. Baltimore, Maryland: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

How do we explain why a society, institution, or individual developed a given response to a natural hazard? Professor Palm presents a framework to investigate hazard response using an approach that integrates macro-, meso-, and micro-level factors. Based on the  structuralist method of analysis that sociologists and geographers developed, this framework builds on the notion that investigating links across all levels (individual, households, society, environment, etc.) reveals better understanding of the impacts of hazards. She employs case studies (all of which are about earthquakes in California) to illustrate the framework in action, but the analytical aspects are limited to economic impacts in general, and the housing market in particular.

Pittsburgh, City of. n.d. City of Pittsburgh Zoning Ordinance. LS-O, Landslide-Prone Overlay District. no. 906.04. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: City of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

----. n.d. City of Pittsburgh Zoning Ordinance. UM-O, Underdermined Area Overlay District. no. 906.05. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: City of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

----. n.d. Subdivision Regulations and Standards of the City Planning Commission. Hillside Development Standards. Subdivision Requirements No. 4.3. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania: City of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Preuss, Jane. 1995. Configuration of Vulnerability: Reconstruction to the Present Anchorage Bowl 1964-1994. Seattle Washington: Urban Regional Research for the National Science Foundation.

Radbruch-Hall, Dorothy H., Roger B. Colton, William E. Davies, Ivo Lucchitta, Betty A. Skipp, and David J. Varnes. 1982. Digital compilation by Johnathan W. Godt. 1997. Digital Representation of Landslide Overview Map of the Conterminous United States. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1183 - Paper Edition.

Reed. Sheila B. 1992. Introduction to Hazards. Disaster Management Training Program, United Nations Development Programme: United Nations.

Reid, Mark E, Richard G. LaHusen and William L. Ellis. 1999. Real-Time Monitoring of Active Landslides. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological survey, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 091-99.

This report shows how real-time monitoring of landslide activity can be used to save human lives and property. Real-time monitoring can detect changes the moment that they occur. This continuous information can provide a better understanding of how landslides occur and help planners and engineers prevent them.

The Royal Academy of Engineering. 1995. Landslides Hazard Mitigation: with Particular reference to Developing Countries. Westminster, London: The Royal Academy of Engineering.

San Francisco Bay Landslide Mapping Team. 1997. San Francisco Bay Region Landslide Folio Home Page. Online. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, USGS Open-File Report 97-745. Available: http://wrgis.wr.usgs.gov/open-file/of97-745/. Last Accessed: 1 February 2000.

Schmidt, Walter. 1997.  Geologic and geotechnical Assessment for the Evaluation of Sinkhole Claims. Tallahassee, Florida: Florida Geological Survey Open-File Report 72.

Schwab, Jim, Kenneth C. Topping, Charles E. Eadie, Robert E. Deyle, and Richard A. Simth. 1998. Planning for Post-Disaster Recovery and Reconstruction. Chicago, Illinois: American Planning Association, Planning Advisory Service Report No. 483/484.

Sponsored by the Federal Emergency Management Agency, this APA report introduces planners to planning for post-disaster recovery. The objective of post-disaster recovery planning is reconstruction that makes the community disaster resistant. It also emphasizes the processes the communities go through in post-disaster recovery: the planning process, the disaster operations process, the roles of various players (local, state, and federal government officials), and legal and financial issues. The hazard identification chapter has a brief section on landslides with a note that it is purposefully brief because of other sources. However, it summarizes key steps for mitigation from Olshansky (1996).

Schwab, Jim. 1992.  Regulating Hillside Development. Zoning News. March 1992.

Schuster, Robert L. 1996. "Socioeconomic Significance of Landslides" in Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Turner, A. Keith, Robert L. Schuster, eds. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Special Report 247. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Schuster, R. L. 2002. Landslides: Effects on the Natural Environment in Proceedings, Symposium on Engineering Geology and the Environment, Athens, Greece: Int l. Assoc. of Engineering Geology, Athens, 23-27 June, vol. 5.

Schuster, Robert L., and Lynn M.Highland. 2001.  Socioeconomic and Environmental Impacts of Landslides in the Western Hemisphere. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 01-0276. Available: http://geology.cr.usgs.gov/pub/open-file-reports/ofr-01-0276/.

Schuster, Robert L., and William J. Kockelman. 1996. "Principles of Landslide Hazard Reduction" in Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Turner, A. Keith, Robert L. Schuster, eds. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Special Report 247. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Siembieda, William, Bruce Baird and Ken Topping. 2002.  Disaster Recovery  A Global Planning Perspective in Interplan. Chicago, Illinois: International Division of the American Planning Association, Issue No. 69.

Smuts, Ed. n.d. Greenways for Pittsburgh. n.p.: City of Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.

Spangle Associates Urban Planning and Research. 1998. Using Earthquake Hazard Maps: A Guide for Local Governments in the Portland Metropolitan Region. Portola Valley, California: Spangle Associates Urban Planning and Research.

Funded by USGS, this report presents alternative approaches to using hazard maps for planning, zoning, subdivision reviews, CIP and facility planning, and emergency management. The underlying purpose of these approaches is to make hazard information readily available in a manner that will help transform knowledge about risks into action for reducing or eliminating them. In the first chapter, maps showing slope instability through amplification, instability, and liquefaction illustrate the extent of risks due to earthquakes. A composite map,  Relative Earthquake Hazard, shows all these risk factors together in a three-scale ranking. It is a good example of how various risk attributes can be combined into a single large community-wide risk summary. It also shows how the region s planned urban centers under the 2040 plan all seem to fall in the top two riskiest zones of the composite map. The report leaves localities to decide how to deal with the risk and their adopted plans. However, it gives a detailed summary of uses of hazard maps (mainly earthquake hazard maps) by local governments for various local government functions: land-use planning, emergency management etc. Table 7 shows a site-specific, seismic hazard investigation requirements list based on the various hazard maps. It groups land uses by their facility types (residential structures, commercial structures, public assembly buildings, etc.) and occupancy characteristics (high, moderate, low, etc.). Although the land-use characteristics are not comprehensive, the illustration shows the appropriate level of site investigation for each of the land-use types. For example, large dams require a site investigation with panel peer review irrespective of their hazard zone location, whereas day care centers only require a site investigation (unless some other data suggest otherwise) in the highest zone and not are required in the zone with least risk. For each of these levels of investigation, the report suggests the steps in recognizing, characterizing, assessing, and mitigating the risks. The section on resolving differences among experts also discusses the importance of relying on unbiased opinions and how to ensure that local governments receive such advice. Some of the applications of the maps include land-use and facility siting examples. The public schools location map shows the areas subject to earthquake hazards with school locations so that schools with unreinforced masonry can be retrofitted.

Spangle, William, and Associates, F. Beach Leighton and Associates, and Baxter, McDonald and Company. 1976. Earth-science Information in Land-use Planning. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, Geological Survey Circular 721.

Jointly funded by USGS Office of Policy Development and Research, and HUD, the San Francisco Bay Region Environment and Resources Planning Study produced this report with the help of Association of Bay Area Governments. It is the first of these USGS reports that comprehensively analyzed the link between earth science information and land-use planning. It not only established the need to have a strong and reliable base of earth science information, but also laid down guidelines for integrating such information in the planning process. Although not meant for just landslides, these guidelines provide sources of data, mapping, scale issues, identification of natural processes on maps, and a land capability rating system (adapted from Livingston and Blayney, 1971). Through examples from around the country, the authors show a variety of options in developing earth-science information.

Spiker, Elliott C., and Paula L. Gori, 2000. National Landslide Hazards Mitigation Strategy: A Framework for Loss Reduction. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 00-450. Available: http://greenwood.cr.usgs.gov/pub/open-file-reports/ofr-00-0450/. Last Accessed: 6 March 2001.

Prepared in response to Public Law 106-113, which directs USGS to develop a national strategy to reduce losses from landslides, this September 2000 report describes a framework for the research, monitoring, mapping, and assessment of landslide hazards nationwide. This report, presented to the U.S. Congress, outlines the National Landslide Hazards Mitigation Strategy in nine elements: research, mapping, real-time monitoring, loss assessment, information collection and dissemination, training and guidelines, public awareness and education, loss reduction measures, and disaster preparedness, response, and recovery.

Steinberg, Michelle, 2002. Are We Planning Safer Communities? Results of a National Survey of Community Planners and Natural Disasters. Tampa, Florida: Institute for Business & Home Safety.

Stover, Carl W. and Coffman, Jerry L. 1993. Seismicity of the United States, 1568-1989 (Revised). Washington: United States Government Printing Office, U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 1527. Abridged form available: http://neic.usgs.gov/neis/eqlists/USA/1964_03_28.html. Last accessed: May 16, 2002.

Turner, A. Keith, and Verne C. McGuffey. 1996.  Organization of Investigation Process in Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Turner, A. Keith, Robert L. Schuster, eds. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Special Report 247. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Turner, A. Keith, Robert L. Schuster, eds. 1996. Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Special Report 247. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

This report is the third one released by the Transportation Research Board. The first one, Report 29, Landslides and Engineering Practice, was published in 1958, which was then updated by a TRB task force in 1972, Report 176, Landslides: Analysis and Control. In 1990, under the chairmanship of A. Keith Turner, TRB initiated another update, which resulted in the current 1996 report. It is by far the most comprehensive and incorporates the latest advances in methods for investigation and mitigation of landslides. In this revision, the 25 chapters, which spread over five parts and are written by 30 authors, have broader international scope than the previous efforts. The primary focus is on investigation and mitigation of landslides. Planning and land-use issues are covered in so far as they explain the risk or establish mitigation options. For the history of landslides, including some famous landslides in Asia and Europe, and definitions of terminology, the first two chapters of part one are indispensable. For a summary of various landslide types and the underlying geologic processes, chapter 3 provides the most concise description through a classification scheme. The causes of landslides are covered in chapter 4, which also has a brief description of the role of zoning and land-use regulations. One section (4.1.3.1) in chapter 5, Principles of Landslide Hazard Reduction, cites the Rogers et al. (1974) model regulations, which recommend recreational uses, low-density agricultural uses, and parking and storage activities in landslide-prone areas. Chapter 6 outlines assessing risks of landslide hazards, methods of estimating risks, making hazard maps, and methods to incorporate historic failure rates. Part two covers the process of investigating a landslide, analyzing the components of the slide, mapping and data interpretation of the area, field testing, and the use of instruments in measuring landslides. Part three covers strength and stability analysis of soils, slopes, and rocks by using the measurements from field-testing. Part four covers mitigation and with a focus on hard solutions, such as stabilizing slopes through reinforcements. Residual soils, colluviums and talus (loose deposits from erosion), shale and other degradable materials (that function as rocks but degrade to soil-size particles when exposed), hydraulic tailings (as a result of mineral processing), loess (silt and fine particles), clays, and permafrost are treated as special cases in the last part.

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District. 1997. Post Even Report: Winter Storm of 1996-97, Federal Disaster DR 1159, Western Washington Summary. Seattle, Washington: U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Seattle District for the Federal Emergency Management Agency

This report contains one section on the landslides that occurred during western Washington s winter storm in 1996-97. The report shows that the landslides were often unexpected and severe. The report also details the causes of the landslides with data and analysis.

U.S. Geological Survey. n.d. Geologic Hazards: Landslides. Online. Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey. Available: http://landslides.usgs.gov/. Last Accessed: 6 March 2001.

U.S. Geological Survey. n.d. USGS Landslide Program: National Landslide Information Center. Golden, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey Hazards Team. Available: http://landslides.usgs.gov/html_files/nlicsun.shtml. Last Accessed: 30 January 2001.

Begin online research about landslides in the U.S. from this location. It is the main website page for the National Landslide Information Center and it features a summary of federal landslide hazard initiatives, a searchable bibliographic database, online versions of key USGS reports on landslide topics, an area that links to active landslide monitoring sites, and a collection of other links, such as avalanches, recent events, global weather patterns, and links to the USGS Center for Integration of Natural Disaster Information (CINDI).

Varnes, D.J. 1978.  Slope Movement Types and Processes in Special Report 176: Landslides: Analysis and Control, R.L. Schuster and R.J. Krizek, eds., Transportation Research Board, National Research Council. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

----. 1984. Landslide Hazard Zonation: A Review of Principles and Practice. Paris: United Nations International.

This book provides commonly used definitions for the terms  landslide,  natural hazard,  vulnerability  specific risk and  total risk. It also reviews in geologic terms the causes of landslides and describes techniques used in investigating landslides. Varnes also includes examples of data sets with mapping techniques. There is a short section on government responses to landslides.

Washington Department of Community Trade and Economic Development. 1998. Optional Comprehensive Plan Element for Natural Hazard Reduction. Olympia, Washington: Washington Department of Community Trade and Economic Development.

Developed through a grant from the Emergency Management Division of the Washington State Military Department, this workbook provides local government planners with tools to address flood, wildfire, and landslide hazards. A team of experts from CTED working with consultants from Urban Regional Research, Berryman & Henigar, and GeoEngineers prepared this workbook for Washington communities. The steps in the workbook very closely tie the development of the hazard reduction plan element of the comprehensive planning process to the key components of the state s Growth Management Act. Mandatory elements of the GMA include land use, housing, capital facilities, transportation, and utilities. For counties, a rural element is mandatory as well. In these elements, the GMA requires communities to address urban growth areas, locating essential facilities, and designation of rural lands and critical areas. The hazard reduction element, as proposed in this workbook, recommends specific actions as mandated by GMA under the various mandatory elements for both linking the goals to planning strategies and implementation. The final chapter is an outline of the natural hazard reduction plan element.

Watanabe, Masyuki, J. P. Brenner, S. Malla, and Nikolai Solomatine. 1996. Mudflows: Experience and Lessons Learned from the Management of Major Disasters. Prepared in support of the International Decade for Natural Disaster Reduction by United Nations Department of Humanitarian Affairs, Geneva. United Nations Publication DHA/96/100, United Nations: New York and Geneva.

Wieczorek, Gerald F. 1996. "Landslide Triggering Mechanisms" in Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Turner, A. Keith, Robert L. Schuster, eds. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Special Report 247. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Wieczorek, Gerald F., Dawit Negussey, and William M. Kappel. 1998.  Landslide Hazards in Glacial Lake Clays - Tully Valley, New York. Denver, Colorado: U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Geological Survey Fact Sheet 013-98. Available: http://pubs.usgs.gov/factsheet/fs13-98/. Last accessed: May 17, 2002.

Areas covered by glacial lake sediments, such as the Tulley Valley in western New York, are highly susceptible to landslides. Following the 1993 landslide in the valley, which is about a mile wide and six miles long, public concerns about potential landslides in areas similar to Tulley Valley led the USGS to prepare a susceptibility map for the region. It encompasses the 160 square-mile southern Onondaga County (that includes Tulley Valley). The three susceptibility categories were derived from statistical modeling of known landslide areas with locations of lake clay deposits, boundaries of glacial lakes, and slope. Local planning agencies employ this 1:50,000 scale map for zoning, land-use, and other related purposes.

Wieczorek, Gerald F., P.L. Gori, R.H. Campbell, and B.A. Morgan. 1995. Landslide and Debris-Flow Hazards Caused by the June 27, 1995, Storm in Madison County, Virginia (includes discussion of mitigation options). Reston, Virginia: U.S. Geological Survey, Open-File Report 95-882.

This is a postmortem report of the devastation caused by numerous rapid landslides in a confined geography during a single storm. It documents the ideal combination of atmospheric conditions and geologic circumstances that lead to such widespread devastation. Besides the loss of nearly 2000 homes and 35,000 acres of crops, what is remarkable is that much of the damage occurred when the small individual debris-flows developed into massive avalanches as they plunged down steep slopes and fanned into the valley floors. Any damage due to flows extends to the fan area, which is where the debris-flow spreads out and in the process dissipating the momentum of the flow. Predicting this impact area is difficult as the flows are dependent on several factors including the moisture level in the flows. The hazard mitigation section explores structural and nonstructural remedies along with their applicability to this disaster. Recommendations in the report include zoning ordinance amendments that restrict hillside development, reevaluation of land-use policies for the region as a whole, establishing a real-time rainfall monitoring system in Madison County, and a public education campaign that distributes pamphlets throughout the Appalachians.

Witten, Jon, Scott Horsley, Sanjay Jeer, and Erin K. Flanagan. 1995. A Guide to Wellhead Protection. Chicago, Illinois: American Planning Association, Planning Advisory Service Report No. 457/458.

The section on protecting wellheads that are drinking water sources, especially if they are sole sources of water supply, offers methods to plan around so the threat to safe water supply can be minimized. Some of the techniques for applying regulatory and zoning overlays may be transferable to landslide hazards as well. Also, the zoning language section is a standard model for developing ordinances that provide options instead of a standard ordinance. Options show variations in ordinance language for each subsection of the ordinance. The format is also conducive to a commentary or narrative explaining the variations and key references to case law and pertinent legal principles.

Wold, Robert L. Jr., and Candace L. Jochim. 1989. Landslide Loss Reduction: A Guide for State and Local Government Planning. Federal Emergency Management Agency, Earthquake Hazards Reduction Series 52.

Funded by FEMA, USGS, Colorado Geological Survey, and the Colorado Division of Disaster Emergency Services, this report was an early guide for planners and local government officials on strategies to reduce losses from landslides. It provides the justification and framework for states and localities to prepare landslide hazard mitigation plans. Its central strategy is to create local interdisciplinary planning teams and a permanent state-level landslide hazard mitigation agency. Other noteworthy topics include benefits of mitigation, causes of landslides, mapping of hazards, and transferring of technical information through a central database. The Plan preparation chapter and the chapter on the planning process are still applicable in many states. However, this section needs an update now that many states have adopted, or are in the process of adopting, state legislation on hazard mitigation.

Wu, Tien H., Wilson H. Tang, and Herbert H. Einstein. 1996.  Landslide Hazard and Risk Assessment in Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Turner, A. Keith, Robert L. Schuster, eds. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Special Report 247. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.

Wyllie, Duncan C., and Norman I. Norrish. 1996.  Stabilization of Rock Slopes in Landslides: Investigation and Mitigation. Turner, A. Keith, Robert L. Schuster, eds. Transportation Research Board, National Research Council, Special Report 247. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press.