Hmmm - maybe stick with Auckland

[JaniceW]

Auckland is suddenly looking very attractive after ChCh earthquake - just looked at the high risk zones for earthquakes. Auckland upwards looking good. My son is a bit freaked out about moving to NZ now, but we are not daunted in the least. Thinking of and praying for all in ChCh.

[tywil]

Auckland is suddenly looking very attractive after ChCh earthquake - just looked at the high risk zones for earthquakes. Auckland upwards looking good. My son is a bit freaked out about moving to NZ now, but we are not daunted in the least. Thinking of and praying for all in ChCh.

Its like living in California - you can run but you can't hide. The whole country is prone to shakes I thought not just the south island (but other can correct me). I am not worried about things I can not change. Earthquake is the last reason that would stop me from checking NZ out

[veronica]

don't worry about it, this one is nothing like the sensationalism that the papers are portraying. Some areas are worse hit but for the main part life is going on very normally, most damage to red brick buildings, very few roads affected so getting around is no problem and as most buildings are timber and tin these are designed for earthquake areas and are still standing firm. more people in hospital from DIY repairs than the actual quake

[Wooly_Cow]

don't worry about it, this one is nothing like the sensationalism that the papers are portraying. Some areas are worse hit but for the main part life is going on very normally, most damage to red brick buildings, very few roads affected so getting around is no problem and as most buildings are timber and tin these are designed for earthquake areas and are still standing firm. more people in hospital from DIY repairs than the actual quake

Really glad no one was killed and that things are OK in many places but ...don't under play it too - 500-1000 properties damaged, 20-30% of them will need totally replacing. Over $2billion of damage for a country with 4 million people is a serious event.

Also Auckalnd and further north is significantly less likely to suffer from these sort of natural events. In the rest of the country being prepared for and being able to live with the risk of earthquakes is a way of life.

...but like someone said this is no different to living in California, Japan, Indonesia, Turkey, Greece, Italy.........and so on

[ellenmelon]

Don't forget that Auckland is built on a large volcanic area. In NZ you have a dramatic landscape yeah? Well that's made by massive forces of nature, which still occur as we saw down in Christchurch and I don't think you can avoid really. I'm not trying to undermine your fears/concerns 'cause I get a little anxious too. But,you can't avoid what the earth decides to do and so it's best to choose somewhere that suits you and your family,prepare yourself practically for the possibility of a natural disaster...then live your life

[Wooly_Cow]

Don't forget that Auckland is built on a large volcanic area.

...but the chances and impact of a volcanic event are much smaller (we are talking factors of 10-100 smaller) than an earthquake. We are talking of a 100-500 year periodicity of an earthquake on most faults in NZ, whilst a volcanic event is measured in a few thousand years. Also a volcanic event in Auckland would spread over a small area as I believe there is not a large magma chamber below the city but rather a set of small ones.

The situation is very different for Taupo however.....if / when that blows up....we'll all know about it...but again the periodicity is very long.

All in all it is not the same order of risk living in Auckland as it is in most of the rest of the country.....and I speak as a non-JAFA living in Wellington.

[Ngeru]

Auckland did have quite a shake (4.5 magnitude) in February of 2007 that caused quite a bit of damage. Volcanic risk is said to be relatively low, as most of Aucklands volcanoes are extinct and Rangitoto is only a youngster. They say that eruption is a once in a 1000 years event.

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10427862

Just to put some perspective on the numbers and frequencies of big shakes, here's a list of the biggest ones:

http://www.nzherald.co.nz/nz/news/ar...ectid=10671059

* 8.2, Wairarapa, January 23, 1855 - The most severe earthquake in New Zealand since systematic European colonisation began in 1840.

* 7.8, Fiordland, July 16, 2009 - only 12km deep and on the coastline at Milford near Dusky Sound: the largest earthquake since the 1931 Napier earthquake. The biggest aftershock was a magnitude 6.1 that occurred 20 minutes after the main shock.

* 7.8, Napier, February 3, 1931 - The 1931 Hawke's Bay earthquake caused the largest loss of life and most extensive damage of any recorded NZ quake.

* 7.8, Murchison, June 17, 1929 - The massive rumbling of the 1929 Buller earthquake was heard as far away as New Plymouth.

* 7.8, Marlborough, October 16, 1848 - This was the largest in a cluster of earthquakes that hit central NZ that year.

* 7.6, Pahiatua, March 5 1934 - Also known as the Horoeka earthquake, it shook the lower North Island and was felt as far away as Auckland and Dunedin.

* 7.2, Wairarapa 1, June 24, 1942 - severely rocked the lower North Island during World War 2, causing extensive damage to local buildings.

* 7.1, Inangahua, May 24, 1968 - The Inangahua earthquake killed three people and was felt over much of the country.

* 7.1, North Canterbury, September 1, 1888 - the Amuri District was shaken by a large earthquake with severe intensities of ground-shaking

* 7.1 Canterbury Sept 4, 2010 - Shallow quake 10km deep and 40km west of Christchurch, with widespread damage and some injuries.

* 7.0, Wairarapa 2, August 2, 1942 - The shock that struck on August 2 was nearly as severe as the disastrous June 24 earthquake five weeks earlier.

[Wooly_Cow]

Sorry got my figures a bit wrong...only the Wellington fault has a short periodicity of about 500 years...the rest are between 1000-3000 years....nevertheless more likely than Auckland volcanoes.

[jeanmarcJ202]

Don't forget that Auckland is built on a large volcanic area. In NZ you have a dramatic landscape yeah? Well that's made by massive forces of nature, which still occur as we saw down in Christchurch and I don't think you can avoid really. I'm not trying to undermine your fears/concerns 'cause I get a little anxious too. But,you can't avoid what the earth decides to do and so it's best to choose somewhere that suits you and your family,prepare yourself practically for the possibility of a natural disaster...then live your life

My wife, with the recent big shake, is fearing our move to NZ soon. As as I told her, everywhere you would go on planet Earth, you have a probability of being hit by a natural disaster or man-made event, it's just a matter of luck or bad luck . You have to live your life and take necessary precautions, as applicable.
JM

[NAP]

Or you could just stay in Ireland/UK and be washed out by the Mega Tsunami that may hit from seismic/volcanic activity in the Canary Islands, causing major displacement of the water around.

Not belittling the scares BTW as it is always on back of minds - but at the end of the day - if you choose to live in an area prone to seismic activities you have to weigh up the options. Generally north of the Auckland isnt on the fault lines but then C.CH was not on a known one either - a little scary..