Search

Two years (2018–2019) of different precipitation products are assessed for their skill in capturing orographic precipitation over the western United States (30°–50°N & 105°–135°W) using two popular methods. The first method defines orographic indices using orographic enhancement and moisture content that represents the amount of moisture advected over sloping terrain. In contrast, the second method classifies precipitation events into orographic and non‐orographic events. NCEP Stage‐IV product is used as a reference. All of the evaluated products (radar, microwave imager/sounder, and infrared) show more significant errors for the orographic than the non‐orographic events. The Global Precipitation Mission (GPM) products; Dual‐frequency Precipitation Radar (DPR), combined radar and radiometer (COMBINE), and GPM Microwave Imager (GMI), and Microwave Humidity Sounder (MHS), severely underestimate the precipitation rates, especially for heavy precipitation (>4 mm/day), whereas infrared precipitation (used in the Integrated Multi‐satellite Retrievals for GPM; IMERG‐IR) and a reanalysis product (ERA5) show relatively better estimation. It was found that the amount of precipitation over the reference (rate BIAS) varies with seasons, so in cold seasons satellite precipitation products tend to underestimate while in warm‐season they (except DPR) tend to overestimate precipitation amount. Most of the satellite products severely underestimate precipitation volume at relatively colder surfaces (<10°C) and lower TPW (<15 mm), but ERA5 shows little rate BIAS in such cases. The underestimation tends to be larger for orographic than non‐orographic events. In contrast, ERA5 shows relatively large underestimation at warmer temperatures (>20°C), where satellite products tend to overestimate precipitation amounts. Key Points: Several satellite‐based precipitation products are compared in relation with orographic enhancementSatellite‐based precipitation BIAS shows a seasonal patternPrecipitation BIAS is associated with the surface temperatures and total precipitable water [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Near‐term ecological forecasting has the potential to mitigate negative impacts of human modifications on wildlife by directing efficient action through relevant and timely predictions. We used the U.S. avian migration system to highlight ecological forecasting applications for aeroconservation. We used millions of observations from 143 weather surveillance radars to construct and evaluate a migration forecasting system for nocturnal bird migration over the contiguous United States. We identified the number of nights of mitigation required to reduce the risk of aerial hazards to 50% of avian migrants passing a given area in spring and autumn based on dynamic forecasts of migration activity. We also investigated an alternative approach, that is, employing a fixed conservation strategy based on time windows that historically capture 50% of migratory passage. In practice, during both spring and autumn, dynamic forecasts required fewer action nights compared with fixed window selection at all locations (spring: mean of 7.3 more alert days; fall: mean of 12.8 more alert days). This pattern resulted in part from the pulsed nature of bird migration captured in the radar data, where the majority (54.3%) of birds move on 10% of a migration season's nights. Our results highlight the benefits of near‐term ecological forecasting and the potential advantages of dynamic mitigation strategies over static ones, especially in the face of increasing risks to migrating birds from light pollution, wind energy infrastructure, and collisions with structures. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]