Which can be good or bad depending on where that increased stress on cascadia and where it increased it.....
The data and evidence show 13 great events in the last 6000 years or so, amounting to an average 430 years or so between events.
And it’s not just sediment data, they have tree ring data from buried timbers.
So even if you go by the average, we still have another 130 years or so, whether the average holds or not, there is NO indication that Cascadia is anywheres near going.
The 1699-1700 event happened after a fairly long duration from the previous one. Guesstimats say the one before 1700 was about 900 AD. so it was WAY over the average when 1700 happened. It’s probably quite safe to say that if you WANT to be around during a big quake, you missed the boat, because the 1700 event was a killer!
It was probably the North American counterpart of the 1960 Chile quake.
Wouldn’t surprise me if there was so much movement and stress relief during the 1700 event that is is quite a bit longer than average before the next event.
If we started seeing a LARGE increase in the micro-quakes, or a medium increase in events like the Nisqually quake, I might get shook up! (The Nisqually quake was very, very special!)
Until then, I’m way more worried about a 130 foot Doug fir falling on my place during a windstorm... or maybe a bear in my backyard! (SOMETHIN HUGE was on my compost pile last night, scared the BJeses out of me!!!)