Issues with Mapping Monthly Winter Precipitation in Near Real-Time
Wayne Gibson and Christopher Daly
Spatial Climate Analysis Service
Oregon State University
June 28, 2004

Introduction | Data Sources | Data Strengths | Case Studies | References | Maps

Introduction
The used of spatially distributed climate data sets is becoming widespread for many applications, including drought and water supply monitoring, analysis of the spatial patterns of climate variations, ecological and fire modeling, and others. The Spatial Climate Analysis Service (SCAS) at Oregon State University produces 4-km resolution maps of monthly precipitation, temperature, and dew point for the conterminous United States 7-14 days after the end of each month. The historical sequence of these monthly maps currently extends uninterrupted back to January 1895. Development of the historical maps through 1997, sponsored by NOAA Office of Global Programs, was performed in collaboration with NCAR and NCDC. Recent years are being mapped in collaboration with the Western Regional Climate Center, and is sponsored by the US Forest Service National Fire Risks and Impacts Project, a program to produce seasonal predictions of national fire risks and impacts. This program functions under the leadership of Ron Neilson of the USFS PNW Research Station in Corvallis, Oregon. Maps and grids can be viewed and downloaded at http://www.ocs.oregonstate.edu/prism/

PRISM (Parameter-Regression Independent Slopes Model) (Daly et al. 1994, 2002, 2003) is used to spatially distribute ground based observations. For this application, it functions in climatologically-aided interpolation mode (CAI). This method takes advantage of the fact that a large portion of the spatial climate and weather patterns we see today occur repeatedly, and thus are contained in the long-term mean climatology. In CAI mode, the predictor grid is not a digital elevation model (DEM), but the official USDA 1971-2000 mean monthly climatology developed for the USDA Natural Resource Conservation Service. CAI mode is robust to changes in data density and placement over time.

Mapping of near real-time precipitation has proven to be a challenge in the winter months over some parts of the United States, mostly due to a lack of quality ground-based data. When temperatures approach freezing, many sensors are not able to capture precipitation accurately in its frozen state. Conditions in Minnesota for January of 2004 illustrate such a case. A large snowstorm occurred Jan 25-27, covering the entire state (Minnesota Climate Monitor 2004). Observational networks failed miserably in accurately recording that event in the near-real time, with the majority of ground based observations recording monthly totals at 0-50% of actual amounts. This was not an isolated incident. Underreporting of precipitation appears to be widespread, and is the most severe where NWS/FAA ASOS (Automated Surface Observing System) is the primary obersvational network. The PRISM spatial QC system was largely ineffective, because nearly all of the observations were ASOS, and virtually no reasonable data were availalble nearby.

This report documents the difficulties that are being encountered in near real-time precipitation mapping, in the hope that such information will stimulate action to improve precipitation observations and increase the availability of high-quality data for mapping efforts.

Data Sources
The primary sources of observations currently used by SCAS for mapping precipitation are: 1) COOP (NWS COOPerative observations), 2) SNOTEL (USDA NRCS SNOw TELemetry), and 3) ASOS (NWS/FAA Automated Surface Observing System). There are a number of other data sources that have recently been added to the SCAS data base via the hydrologic data set made available to NCEP by the NWS River Forecast Centers: 1) Municipal ALERT (Automated Local Evaluation in Real Time), 2) GOES DCP (Data Collection Platforms), 3) MESONET, 4) LARC reports (Limited Area Remote Collectors), and some USFS/BLM RAWS (Remote Automatic Weather Station) data.

Except for the western US, most COOP stations are unavailable to SCAS for 30 days after the end of the month (e.g. January data are available around March 1st). A first run of non-quality controlled digitized data is made available by the Western Regional Climate Center for the western states within 5 days after the end of the month.

SNOTEL data are provided online by the Natural Resources Conservation Service. This data source alone provides the best network of upper elevation precipitation observations in the inter-mountain West.

The ASOS network is found at all major and minor airports, and is national in scope.

Some of the MESONETs provide high-quality observations. One such example is the Oklahoma MESONET, which alone captures a better representation of precipitation that all other data sources in the state combined.

The remaining observational networks help provide better spatial coverage. Station coverage maps for SCAS near real-time precipitation mapping can be viewed at http://www.ocs.orst.edu/prism/products/matrix.phtml

Part of the issue in near real-time modelling is simply due to the availability of data in a timely manner. The following table illustrates the time lag SCAS experiences in receiving data from each network after the last day of each month.

Data Source Time Lag (after end of month)
COOP

Provisional: 3 days western US, 1 month entire US

ASOS none
SNOTEL 1 day
ALERT 1 day
DCP 1 day
MESONET 1 day
LARC 1 day
Table 1: Data sources and time lag until data are received at SCAS.

Data Strengths and Weaknesses
Over the long-term monthly time scale, COOP and SNOTEL represent the most stable networks. While COOP observations do present some issues (i.e. time of observation, observer or digitizer modifying observations, conversion of snowdepth to liquid precipitation, unshielded gauges), it is a stable and reliable data source. The most challenging issue in the near real-time is access to the actual observations and scanned B-44 observation forms (e.g., useful in QC of suspicious monthly observations).

SNOTEL is the single most important network for observations at higher elevations in the snow zone. Unfortunately, since the network was designed for water supply forecasting, most of the sites are only found in the western US. This does not help when modelling the central and eastern US.

While ASOS has good spatial coverage, precipitation observations are often suspicious. Precipitation is available in 1, 3, 6, and 24 hour accumulations. Often the accumulations don't match each other. For example, summing six 1-hourly observations does not match the 6-hourly summary provided in the data report. In addition, heated tipping buckets are used to measure precipitation, and that type of gauge is known to perform poorly when measuring frozen precipitation (this appears to be the main problem behind mssing the Minnesota snow storm of January 2004).

While we aren't as familiar with the other networks, they add spatial density to the observations. At this point in time, use of the other data sources seems to improve the quality of maps produced.

Case Study Maps
A separate document that illustrates monthly maps for January 2004 created from the various data sources can be found on the map page. The maps illustrate the changes in quality over a 6 month time period in which COOP data quality transitions from quick look (previous 1-3 months) to preliminary (4 months ago), and then final (5 months ago) data quality. Maps were created for January 2004. In general, as many data sources as possible are used to create the previous month's map. As additional COOP data are available in subsequent months, COOP and SNOTEL are used exclusively.

References
Daly, C., W. P. Gibson, G.H. Taylor, G. L. Johnson, P. Pasteris. 2002. A knowledge-based approach to the statistical mapping of climate. Climate Research, 22: 99-113.

Daly, C., E.H. Helmer, and M. Quinones. 2003. Mapping the climate of Puerto Rico, Vieques, and Culebra. International Journal of Climatology, 23: 1359-1381.

Daly, C., R.P. Neilson, and D.L. Phillips. 1994. A statistical-topographic model for mapping climatological precipitation over mountainous terrain. Journal of Applied Meteorology 33: 140-158.

Minnesota Climate Monitor. 2004. URL:<http://climate.umn.edu/doc/journal/hc0402.htm>

Copyright (c) 2004, Spatial Climate Analysis Service, Oregon State University