Four sets of geo‐referenced grids of 1961–90 normals, or thirty‐year averages, of monthly maximum and minimum temperatures, and total precipitation are compared for the following areas of western Canada: Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and south‐eastern British Columbia. The landscape varies from lowlands around Hudson Bay in the east and flat plains in the south, to moderate elevation hills and numerous lakes in the north, to a complex terrain of high mountains and deep valleys in the west. Interpolation methods used to create the grids range from a very simple technique ‐ Inverse Distance Weighting (IDW) of closest neighbours, to more sophisticated statistical models ‐ ANUSPLIN (thin plate smoothing splines on geographic location and elevation) and SQUARE‐GRID (multivariate regression on elevation, distance from large water bodies and barriers, etc.), to even more complex hybrid systems ‐ PRISM (statistical regression, combined with physical models and expert knowledge). The main characteristics of each technique are discussed in detail, as they are often very good predictors of the accuracy of the ensuing gridpoint values. Based on the intercomparison of point and average values, as well as the verification of temperature with upper air soundings and precipitation with streamflow measurements, all grids, except SQUARE‐GRID for precipitation, produce very good results in the Prairies’ ecozone. Temperatures in most cases agree within 1°C and precipitation within several percent. PRISM, which was verified to model the Arctic inversion correctly, performs the best in winter in northern Saskatchewan, Manitoba, and Alberta, in particular, over the hills of northern Alberta (PRISM warmer), and most likely over low lying areas of the Nelson River Delta (PRISM colder). PRISM and ANUSPLIN can be recommended for the mountains of south‐eastern British Columbia and southwestern Alberta. Both grids verify well, in both winter and summer, with upper air soundings for maximum temperature and station vertical profiles for minimum temperature. They are remarkably close to water balance estimates of precipitation computed from streamflow gauge measurements ‐ PRISM is slightly high and ANSUPLIN slightly low. Precipitation from IDW and SQUARE‐GRID are not satisfactory in the mountains; both severely underestimate precipitation by as much as 40%. IDW, which does not incorporate any orographic effects, is also too warm in the mountains. As expected, topography, physiography, and monitoring network issues are sources of major discrepancies among the grids. SQUARE‐GRID, besides using far fewer stations and a preprocessed dataset, also produced anomalous values, e.g., values of zero precipitation along the eastern slopes of the Rocky Mountains.
Read full abstract