Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Images

Volcano Science Center images.

Filter Total Items: 534
Spectrogram and waveform of a typical Volcano-Tectonic (VT) earthquake that occurred near Norris Geyser Basin, Yellowstone National Park
Spectrogram and waveform of a volcano-tectonic (VT) earthquake in Yellowstone
Spectrogram and waveform of a volcano-tectonic (VT) earthquake in Yellowstone
Spectrogram and waveform of a volcano-tectonic (VT) earthquake in Yellowstone

Spectrogram of a typical volcano-tectonic (VT) earthquake that occurred near Norris Geyser Basin, in the same region similar depth as the possible long-period (LP) event that was recorded on August 26, 2021.  The top panel shows a 30-second seismogram recorded at seismic station YHH.  The bottom panel shows the spectrogram with energy ranging from 1-15 Hz

Spectrogram of a typical volcano-tectonic (VT) earthquake that occurred near Norris Geyser Basin, in the same region similar depth as the possible long-period (LP) event that was recorded on August 26, 2021.  The top panel shows a 30-second seismogram recorded at seismic station YHH.  The bottom panel shows the spectrogram with energy ranging from 1-15 Hz

Photo and lidar image of Highway 191 landslide, near Yellowstone National Park
Photo and lidar image of Highway 191 landslide, near Yellowstone National Park
Photo and lidar image of Highway 191 landslide, near Yellowstone National Park
Photo and lidar image of Highway 191 landslide, near Yellowstone National Park

Top shows aerial photo of a section of US Highway 191 north of West Yellowstone in Montana. Bottom shows lidar imagery that reveals the road traversing a landslide deposit. High elevations are brown and white, and green is lower elevation. Shading indicates steeper slopes.

Top shows aerial photo of a section of US Highway 191 north of West Yellowstone in Montana. Bottom shows lidar imagery that reveals the road traversing a landslide deposit. High elevations are brown and white, and green is lower elevation. Shading indicates steeper slopes.

Landsat 8 nighttime thermal infrared image of Yellowstone from 28 January 2022
Landsat 8 nighttime thermal infrared image of Yellowstone from 28 January 2022
Landsat 8 nighttime thermal infrared image of Yellowstone from 28 January 2022
Landsat 8 nighttime thermal infrared image of Yellowstone from 28 January 2022

Landsat 8 nighttime thermal infrared image of Yellowstone from 28 January 2022.  Inset images are zoomed in on the area outlined by the white square.  Inset image (A) has the raw data values, which range from 9070 to 21284.  Inset image (B) shows the same image converted to spectral radiance, where values range from 3.13 to 7.21 W/m2/micron

Landsat 8 nighttime thermal infrared image of Yellowstone from 28 January 2022.  Inset images are zoomed in on the area outlined by the white square.  Inset image (A) has the raw data values, which range from 9070 to 21284.  Inset image (B) shows the same image converted to spectral radiance, where values range from 3.13 to 7.21 W/m2/micron

Seismic signal showing an icequake on Yellowstone Lake
Seismic signal of an icequake on Yellowstone Lake from January 24, 2022.
Seismic signal of an icequake on Yellowstone Lake from January 24, 2022.
Seismic signal of an icequake on Yellowstone Lake from January 24, 2022.

Signals from a suspected icequake that occurred on Yellowstone Lake recorded at Yellowstone Seismic Network stations YLA on Lake Butte (top) and YTP at The Promontory (bottom 3 plots). Plot shows about 2 minutes of data from January 24, 2022, starting at about 7:43:34 p.m. MST.  YLA waveform (YLA EHZ) was recorded on a vertical short-period sensor.

Signals from a suspected icequake that occurred on Yellowstone Lake recorded at Yellowstone Seismic Network stations YLA on Lake Butte (top) and YTP at The Promontory (bottom 3 plots). Plot shows about 2 minutes of data from January 24, 2022, starting at about 7:43:34 p.m. MST.  YLA waveform (YLA EHZ) was recorded on a vertical short-period sensor.

Plot showing seismic and acoustic waves from the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai eruption as recorded in Yellowstone
Seismic and acoustic waves from the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai eruption recorded by the Yellowstone Seismic Network
Seismic and acoustic waves from the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai eruption recorded by the Yellowstone Seismic Network
Seismic and acoustic waves from the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai eruption recorded by the Yellowstone Seismic Network

Signals recorded at station YDD in Yellowstone National Park from the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai volcanic eruption. The seismometer at YDD recorded both the direct seismic phase (top left) as well as the atmospheric Lamb Wave that coupled to the ground as it propagated (top right).  The infrasound microphone at YDD recorded the atmospheric disturbance

Signals recorded at station YDD in Yellowstone National Park from the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai volcanic eruption. The seismometer at YDD recorded both the direct seismic phase (top left) as well as the atmospheric Lamb Wave that coupled to the ground as it propagated (top right).  The infrasound microphone at YDD recorded the atmospheric disturbance

Plot showing seismic and acoustic waves from the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai eruption as recorded in Yellowstone
Seismic and acoustic waves from the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai eruption recorded by the Yellowstone Seismic Network
Seismic and acoustic waves from the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai eruption recorded by the Yellowstone Seismic Network
Seismic and acoustic waves from the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai eruption recorded by the Yellowstone Seismic Network

Signals recorded at station YDD in Yellowstone National Park from the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai volcanic eruption. The seismometer at YDD recorded both the direct seismic phase (top left) as well as the atmospheric Lamb Wave that coupled to the ground as it propagated (top right).  The infrasound microphone at YDD recorded the atmospheric disturbance

Signals recorded at station YDD in Yellowstone National Park from the 2022 Hunga Tonga–Hunga Haʻapai volcanic eruption. The seismometer at YDD recorded both the direct seismic phase (top left) as well as the atmospheric Lamb Wave that coupled to the ground as it propagated (top right).  The infrasound microphone at YDD recorded the atmospheric disturbance

Plot showing deformation and seismicity near South Sister during 2001-2022
Deformation and seismicity near South Sister during 2001-2022
Deformation and seismicity near South Sister during 2001-2022
Deformation and seismicity near South Sister during 2001-2022

Comparison of vertical GPS motion measured at station HUSB (top) with earthquake depth (bottom). Red line is a 60-day average of the cleaned GPS time series plotted in gray. Earthquakes are plotted with respect to their magnitudes. The swarm in 2004 represents the vast majority of earthquake in the vicinity of the deforming region.

Comparison of vertical GPS motion measured at station HUSB (top) with earthquake depth (bottom). Red line is a 60-day average of the cleaned GPS time series plotted in gray. Earthquakes are plotted with respect to their magnitudes. The swarm in 2004 represents the vast majority of earthquake in the vicinity of the deforming region.

Map of seismicity in the Yellowstone region during 2021
Seismicity in the Yellowstone region during 2021
Seismicity in the Yellowstone region during 2021
Seismicity in the Yellowstone region during 2021

Map of seismicity (red circles) in the Yellowstone region during 2021. Gray lines are roads, black dashed line shows the caldera boundary, Yellowstone National Park is outlined by black dot-dashed line, and gray dashed lines denote state boundaries.

Map of seismicity (red circles) in the Yellowstone region during 2021. Gray lines are roads, black dashed line shows the caldera boundary, Yellowstone National Park is outlined by black dot-dashed line, and gray dashed lines denote state boundaries.

GPS time series from station HUSB, 2001-2022, showing uplift west of South Sister, Oregon
GPS time series from station HUSB, 2001-2022
GPS time series from station HUSB, 2001-2022
GPS time series from station HUSB, 2001-2022

Time series showing daily vertical GPS positions from the continuous GPS station HUSB between 2001 and 2022.

Scarp of the Uhl Hill fault in eastern Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming
Scarp of the Uhl Hill fault in eastern Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming
Scarp of the Uhl Hill fault in eastern Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming
Scarp of the Uhl Hill fault in eastern Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming

Scarp of the Uhl Hill fault. Photo (top) is looking west at the east-facing fault scarp, with a geologist at the top of the scarp for scale. Here, the fault cuts through Pinedale-1 glacial deposits just south of a Pinedale-2 end moraine. Plot (bottom) is a scarp profile generated from lidar elevation data.

Scarp of the Uhl Hill fault. Photo (top) is looking west at the east-facing fault scarp, with a geologist at the top of the scarp for scale. Here, the fault cuts through Pinedale-1 glacial deposits just south of a Pinedale-2 end moraine. Plot (bottom) is a scarp profile generated from lidar elevation data.

Siliceous sinter in the field and viewed via Scanning Electron Microscope
Siliceous sinter in the field and viewed via Scanning Electron Microscope
Siliceous sinter in the field and viewed via Scanning Electron Microscope
Siliceous sinter in the field and viewed via Scanning Electron Microscope

Left photo shows a loose piece of siliceous sinter that was precipitated around a photosynthetic microbial mat in the Lower Geyser Basin.  The microbial mat died when the outflow channel changed positions.

Interferogram spanning 2020-2021 and showing uplift west of South Sister
Interferogram spanning 2020-2021 and showing uplift west of South Sister
Interferogram spanning 2020-2021 and showing uplift west of South Sister
Interferogram spanning 2020-2021 and showing uplift west of South Sister

Satellite radar interferogram spanning June 19, 2020, to August 13, 2021, and showing the ground motion in the direction of the satellite.

Castle Geyser features and Scanning Electron Microscope image of algal filament in a silica sheath
Castle Geyser features and Scanning Electron Microscope image of algal filament in a silica sheath
Castle Geyser features and Scanning Electron Microscope image of algal filament in a silica sheath
Castle Geyser features and Scanning Electron Microscope image of algal filament in a silica sheath

On the left is Castle Geyser during an eruption with a pool from nearby Tortoise Shell Spring showing photosynthetic pigments at the bottom. The middle image is of a small pool in the Geyser Hill Group in the Upper Geyser Basin with an outflow channel full of yellow, green, orange, red, and brown pigmented phototrophic microbial mats.

On the left is Castle Geyser during an eruption with a pool from nearby Tortoise Shell Spring showing photosynthetic pigments at the bottom. The middle image is of a small pool in the Geyser Hill Group in the Upper Geyser Basin with an outflow channel full of yellow, green, orange, red, and brown pigmented phototrophic microbial mats.

Difference in mapped rock units for Mount Everts, Yellowstone National Park
Difference in mapped rock units for Mount Everts, Yellowstone National Park
Difference in mapped rock units for Mount Everts, Yellowstone National Park
Difference in mapped rock units for Mount Everts, Yellowstone National Park

Simplified geologic maps showing the difference in mapped rock units from the current, large-scale geologic maps dividing Mount Everts and that join along the boundary between Montana and Wyoming.

Map of the Uhl Hill fault in eastern Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming
Map of the Uhl Hill fault in eastern Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming
Map of the Uhl Hill fault in eastern Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming
Map of the Uhl Hill fault in eastern Grand Teton National Park, Wyoming

Map of the Uhl Hill fault in eastern Grand Teton National Park. Base map is a 1-meter lidar hillshade. Black arrows mark the visible fault scarp, and red lines mark locations where scarp profiles were generated from lidar data or field surveying.

Map of the Uhl Hill fault in eastern Grand Teton National Park. Base map is a 1-meter lidar hillshade. Black arrows mark the visible fault scarp, and red lines mark locations where scarp profiles were generated from lidar data or field surveying.

Woman with long brown hair and a snowy background
Michelle Coombs
Michelle Coombs
Michelle Coombs

Michelle Coombs is a volcanologist with the U.S. Geological Survey Volcano Hazards Program. She works out of the Alaska Science Center in Anchorage, Alaska.

Michelle Coombs is a volcanologist with the U.S. Geological Survey Volcano Hazards Program. She works out of the Alaska Science Center in Anchorage, Alaska.

Regional map of southeastern Idaho showing Stanley earthquakes
Regional map of southeastern Idaho showing Stanley earthquakes
Regional map of southeastern Idaho showing Stanley earthquakes
Regional map of southeastern Idaho showing Stanley earthquakes

Regional map of southeastern Idaho showing the relative location of Yellowstone National Park and the Stanley earthquake aftershocks. Yellowstone National Park (outlined in yellow) is at least 275 km away from the 2020 Mw6.5 Stanley earthquake. Several active faults (in red) are located between the Stanley earthquake and Yellowstone Caldera.

Regional map of southeastern Idaho showing the relative location of Yellowstone National Park and the Stanley earthquake aftershocks. Yellowstone National Park (outlined in yellow) is at least 275 km away from the 2020 Mw6.5 Stanley earthquake. Several active faults (in red) are located between the Stanley earthquake and Yellowstone Caldera.

Cumulative number of aftershocks greater than magnitude 2.5 following the 2020 magnitude 6.5 Stanley earthquake
Cumulative number of aftershocks greater than magnitude 2.5 following the 2020 magnitude 6.5 Stanley earthquake
Cumulative number of aftershocks greater than magnitude 2.5 following the 2020 magnitude 6.5 Stanley earthquake
Cumulative number of aftershocks greater than magnitude 2.5 following the 2020 magnitude 6.5 Stanley earthquake

Cumulative number of aftershocks greater than magnitude 2.5 following the March 30, 2020, magnitude-6.5 Stanley earthquake in central Idaho. The black line shows the observed aftershocks, the red line shows the predicted number of aftershocks. Aftershocks are a normal and expected phenomenon following strong tectonic earthquakes.

Cumulative number of aftershocks greater than magnitude 2.5 following the March 30, 2020, magnitude-6.5 Stanley earthquake in central Idaho. The black line shows the observed aftershocks, the red line shows the predicted number of aftershocks. Aftershocks are a normal and expected phenomenon following strong tectonic earthquakes.

Was this page helpful?