This is an archive of past discussions about Mediterranean climate. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.
Areas with this climate receive almost all their rain during the winter months, and may go 4-5 months during the summer without having any precipitation. This is due to the shifting of the wind belts following the apparent movement of the sun.
As an example, San Francisco has 350-450mm of rain from November to February each year, but receives less than 100mm of rain for the rest of the year.
Sure somebody noticed all that "lol", "wtf" and the ~20 other edits you did. Sometimes it's just interesting to see how long childish crap like this will stay on wikipedia. Ah well, time to remove it --Pepijn Koster16:48, 28 November 2005 (UTC)
Comment
article lists "cool, wet winters" and "hot, very dry summers" as the characteristics of mediterranean climates. I think the temperatures listed need some editing, as mediterranean climates can be quite cool in the summer if they are on a cold ocean coast, as many of them are: a prime example is San Francisco, California. Coastal Chile is another example. I think that mediterranean climates could be more accurately described as having cool/mild, moist winters and a pronounced summer drought. Summer temperatures in mediterranean climate regimes are so variable that there's no way to accurately generalize them.
I think that if if this point were better understood people would have less trouble accepting that the Olympic rainshadow area in the Pacific Northwest characterizes a marginal "mediterranean-like" climate. Its winter temperatures are probably not quite mild enough, but its summer drought period is certainly as pronounced as in many classical 'mediterranean-type' climate locations, and its moderate summer temperatures are not an inhibiting factor to it being classified as such. If anything its cool-on-average winter temps are...24.86.196.52 (talk) 20:37, 23 July 2008 (UTC)
Intent and Usefulness of "Mediterranean" as a climate description
Gardeners here in Victoria, if asked what kind of climate they enjoy, sometimes say "cool Mediterranean". The point of such a description is (a) temperatures tend to be mild year round, generally not very cold in winter nor very hot in summer and (b) rainfall is mostly in the winter, with a prolonged drought most summers. This in turn implies that many summer-dormant bulbous plants thrive, as do many plants native to indisputable Mediterranean climates such as rosemary. Conversely, there is an implication that plants from summer-rainfall climates such as Japan are ill-adapted. My own experience, in fact, is that Japanese plants are pretty much a failure: if they do not desiccate to nothingness in the summer, they rot away to mush during the winter rains. These effects can be ameliorated by providing good drainage for the winter and irrigation in the summer, but, for example, Tricyrtis is not a success in most Victoria gardens.
A further distinction between Victoria's climate and a true Mediterranean climate lies in the outflows of very cold arctic air from the interior of the continent that occur some winters.
I should further add that Victoria is especially dry in summer as it lies in a profound rainshadow cast by the Sooke Hills, and the same general climate continues northward along the east coast of Vancouver Island to about Nanaimo. It's a very restricted geographic range, with, I believe, some extensions southward on the east side of the Olympic Peninsula in Washington State.
It seems to me that this surprisingly contentious topic can be resolved by answering the question, what is the purpose of the Wikipedia article on "Mediterranean climate". I'm not going to touch that one with a ten-foot pole,
I realize that the map says that Perth has a Mediterranean climate, but in the second paragraph it's used as an example of Mediterranean climate. This confused me at first, and it makes more sense to me to use an actual Mediterranean city as an example of the climate. Couldn't we make it something like Rome or Athens? BaboonOfTheYard (talk) 15:38, 6 January 2009 (UTC)
Did you read what this article is about? It's not about the climate of the Mediterranean Sea but Mediterranean-like climate (specfically, Csa and Csb) throughout the world. Perth is used as an example of a city with a Mediterranean climate located in the SOUTHERN HEMISPHERE, which would exclude Rome/Athens, cities in the NORTHERN HEMISPHERE. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Infernalfox (talk • contribs) 18:52, 8 January 2009 (UTC)
An objection to replacing CT with EL? CT is currently the most temperate southern hemisphere example, but EL is even more temperate: CT's difference between highest month average high (26°C) - lowest month average low (7°C) is 19°C; and EL's is only 16°C (26-10). -- Jeandré, 2009-02-20t14:06z
Huge objections! East London does NOT have a Mediterranean climate.
East London has a Cfa climate. It is certainly not arid, tropical, or polar; the coolest month is above freezing, so the climate is in the "C" group. Rainfall is clearly seasonal, but not enough so that it allows a clear-cut season of drought, as the wettest month has less than three times the precipitation of the driest -- thus the suffix "f". All months are above the 10 C average monthly temperature, and the warmest is above 20 C, which implies the suffix "a". If you wish to put the climograph for East London anywhere, then put it with the "humid subtropical" group where it belongs. --Paul from Michigan (talk) 14:45, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
Mediterranean and Oceanic climates
All the debate over whether or not places in the Pacific Northwest are mediterranean or mediterranean-like in climate got me looking into it these last few days. I poured over climagraphs of precipitation and temperate by month for a bunch of cities around the world and found no answer there. According to the Köppen climate classification, at least as described on that page, my temperate and precipitation charts seem to put Seattle into the Cs "mediterranean" climate, yet an obviously mediterranean city like Florence seems to fail -- the driest month still gets more than a third of the precipitation as the wettest (at least according to the data I dug up), which would make it a Cf climate.
Finally I began to stumble upon the idea that climate classification schemes like Köppen's were intented from the start to create climate types that closely corresponded to major vegetation types or biomes. The particular temperate and precipitation "breakpoints" between climate classes were chosen, apparently, to try to make climate classes match up well with vegetation classes. Later modifications to Köppen's system were mainly attempts to make the matches better. Most other climate classification schemes are similar.
So with that in mind, and looking at the very different vegetation of classic mediterranean climate regions (like Tuscany, or Santa Barbara) and the Pacific Northwest cities often claimed to have mediterranean climates (Seattle, Victoria, etc) -- the chaparral and shrubland vegetation on one hand, the dense tall conifer forests on the other -- I'm left thinking that those climate classification schemes that end up calling Seattle "mediterranean" are essentially failing to well-match climate classes with biome classes.
Anyway, I'll probably continue looking into the topic, but I thought I'd post these thoughts here -- do they make sense? Pfly07:30, 10 April 2007 (UTC)
But Victoria isn't "dense tall confier forests" as Seattle mostly is. Most of the city of Victoria, prior to colonization, was scrubby, dry garry oak meadowland and arbutus forest (garry oaks and arbutus - "madrone" - grow south to California as well). These dry meadows experienced many periodic summer fires and were an important source of food for the native peoples. That's why I believe that the driest areas of the PNW - namely Victoria, the Gulf Islands, the San Juan Islands and parts of the Olympic peninsula should indeed count as med, whereas Seattle, Portland, Vancouver, etc., would not. They're simply not as dry, and the vegetation shows this.66.183.95.29 (talk) 08:06, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
Heh, thanks.. looking into it more, I've learned a few more things. First, since climate regions are, like biomes and ecoregions, large and generalized units, there are going to be many sites within a climate region that don't meet the criteria. The point of large-region classification is to "smooth out" the local variations and give a general picture. So even if a specific place, like a city, doesn't quite fit the climate region's definition, it doesn't invalidate the classification. Second, I was surprised to learn that Trewartha modified Köppen's system precisely because it classed western Washington and Oregon with southern California (and a similar issue on the US Atlantic coast). And even then, the notion that Oceanic climates have "no dry season", which I think Trewartha continued to use, doesn't hold for the Pacific Northwest or southern Chile. I'm wondering if this has to do with the size of the Pacific Ocean. Apparently the Mediterranean climates of the world are linked to high pressure oceanic air masses shifting polarward during the summer -- in effect "bringing the Sahara to southern Europe", the Sonora to California, etc (and perhaps one could say "bringing California to the PNW"). In the Atlantic, the ocean highs are smaller, less stable, and shift less than in the Pacific, I think. So the Atlantic "Azores High" is not able to bring a dry season to Paris, while the Pacific "Hawaiian High" is able to do it for the Pacific Northwest. Anyway, I'm not sure on that last point -- still looking into it. Will try to add info to various pages if I see a need and can figure out how, and have the time.
A final idea that struck me as I read a climate book is that some climatologists think people spend too much time focusing on and debating about climatic boundaries, rather than on the climates "cores" -- "some might feel the desert itself is more important than the desert boundary". I've long made that same point on the topic of "cultural regions" like the American Midwest -- there's no need for near flame-wars over whether Oklahoma is Midwestern, or Maryland is Southern. So when I realized I was starting to overfocus on climatic boundaries I nearly smacked myself! Pfly19:32, 12 April 2007 (UTC)
I could not agree more and I think we finally getting somewhere. To the summer shifts mentioned above, you can add "bringing the Great Victoria Desert to Perth and Adelaide".
Yes, good idea! That's part of why I added links to chaparral, fynbos, etc. I just wish there was a page for kwongan along the lines of the excellent fynbos page. I briefly thought about making a basic page for kwongan, but my brief research managed only to make me confused -- is kwongan a word used generally for Australia's heath and shrublands, or is it limited to a specific heathland? I almost linked to Mallee or Mallee (biogeographic region) instead, but neither seemed appropriate equivalents of chaparral, maquis, fynbos, etc. Other pages mentioning these things linked to kwongan, so I just went along, not really knowing what I was talking about. Pfly07:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Kwongan usually refers only to shrubland/heathland/sandplains in Southwest Australia only. Not usually in south eastern Australia, where it is "coastal heathland" and north central coast, where "wallum" is the preferred term. There are some moves to adopt Kwongan as a generic name, but I don't think that has really taken off. I will investigate this further when I have ready access to a suitable library at the moment. The web resources seem to be very poor. Grant | Talk09:05, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
Seeing Portland, Seattle and even some of southern Idaho on that Koppen map as Csb "Mediterranean" is a shocker: [[1]].
I dont see how all these articles on Wikipedia claim a "Mediterranean-like" climate. I know some places have some aspects that might seem more 'mediterranean-like' but it shouldnt be said it is "semi-Mediterranean" or "quasi-Mediterranean," etc...it should be just said they experience '___________'(whatever characteristic that makes it unique as compared to other similarly classified places with such a climate. A place can only have ONE type of climate-it shouldnt be embellished that Seattle might have a July-September period that is "sunnier and drier 'California weather'" and therefore strengethens an argument to classify it as 'semi-Mediterranean' is sort of silly. If we continue to slice and dice places' climates like this using a few sources, we would have Boise claiming they have "semi-Mediterranean climate"(it is considered such on the map up there, if Im not mistaken). Part of the reason this is ceating confusion is because most people have the perception of a Med. climate as being the Csa climate that typfies Greece, S. Italy, S. California, etc and not the Csb climates that are actually pretty rare in the Mediterranean region (only found in the inland parts of N.-Atlantic Portugal and C. Turkey). That being said, it sort of misleads people, which I think is the source of some confusion here.
I personally dont think Seattle and much of the PNW is a Mediterranean or Csb
, more like a Cfb or Cwb in my experience. To me this map paints a better picture of reality: http://distance.una.edu/ge111/weeks/images/us_koppen.jpg . 66.82.9.49 (talk) 06:46, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Criteria for the Cs/Cf boundary exist: Mediterranean precipitation implies inadequate precipitation in at least one summer month that is at most one-third of the winter maximum. That the Pacific Northwest has magnificent Douglas firs and looks more like Norway or Scotland changes nothing. Majestic redwoods flourish in California, too, and no matter how mild the climate, their biome has extreme summer drought. Nothing says that trees -- even giant ones -- cannot evolve to meet seasonal drought.
Summer droughts extend farther north in western North America than in western Europe, probably because western Europe (aside from Norway, much too far north to have a summer drought) has no lines of mountains parallel to the coastline. A place like Aberdeen, Washington might be so humid even in the summer that it has a true west-coast humid Cfb climate, but Seattle is in a partial rainshadow in the summer (if not in the winter).
Perhaps such is a flaw in the Koppen classification -- that it does not allow a clear variant for extreme maritime climates that might get enough precipitation in the winter to more than compensate for summer droughts. That would keep San Francisco clearly in a Mediterranean zone because during the three summer months it is as dry as almost any desert and its modest rainfall is not enough to require plant life to make extreme adaptations for summer drought. Such is distinguished in the Am variant (an innovation) between Af (rainforest) and Aw (savanna) climates of the tropics. A different middle letter might be appropriate for a place like Seattle that has a marked summer drought but enough winter precipitation for plants to store through the summer. --Paul from Michigan (talk) 15:09, 9 May 2009 (UTC)
This is repeated again from 'MICRO CLIMATE SECTION ABOVE'
I'm referring to a book by Trewartha-An Introduction to Climate 4th edition by McGrawHill Book Company As originally classified by Koppen's classification of climates, CS climate covered Western Oregon,W.Washington,SW British Columbia, and eastward from W. Oregon about 44-46 degrees North east to cover much of Idaho. Later climatologist like Trewartha and others had to modify the menu by adding: at least 8 months must have average temperatures of 50F and above and the average annual precipitation must not exceed 35 inches . These 2 additons pretty much caused the original Koppen classification to cover only low altitude California. The precipitation regime of the US Pacific northwest like Seattle or Portland is unusual and is actually more proper to classify it as Temperate Oceanic like that of London, UK or Amsterdam. Depending on your point of view, Western Europe has no dry season, the entire lowlands of far Western CS, CFC climates of the US has virually no thunderstorms while Western Europe has many.--Daysaregreat (talk) 18:02, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
Both Oporto, Portugal and Seattle, Washington will fail the Mediterranean Climate in its' pure form, Oporto has too much precipatation while Seattle has too many cool months.Seattle has coniferous forests, while Oporto would probably have the same.
Oporto has about 2 dozen strong thunderstorms per year due to unstable air mass while Seattle has about 6 mild thunderstorms annually due to much more stable Pacific Air Mass. The frontal airmass the US Pacific Northwest receives is cooler than Atlantic coastal Western Europe-generally the warmfront is already occluded before reaching the coast of the US Northwest whereas Atlantic coastal Europe the warmfront is still intact and occasionally warm moist air from the Mediterraneam Sea
is within the warmfront. The dewpoint for Portland, Oregon and Seattle,Washington rarely reaches 60F (15C) while in Western Portugal the dewpoint averages over 60F (15C)in the summer and will reach 70F (21C) over half the days in July --Daysaregreat (talk) 08:31, 14 June 2009 (UTC)
I would like to say that coastern northern Portugal forests are of deciduous trees, which loose their leaves in Autumn and when Spring begins new leaves will grow again. 82.154.193.212 (talk) 02:17, 6 March 2010 (UTC)
Can someone with actual knowledge elaborate on this?... The bit about the mediterranean micro-climates is stretching it: parts of the Pacific Northwest as far north as southern British Columbia may resemble a mediterranean climate, sometimes- but I don't think there is a basis for this comment. I live in the region and have travelled extensively here, southern and western europe, and Santigao, Chile. I don't really see a consistent similarity. Here (SW British Columbia), it is essentially the same temperate west coast climate that stretches from Prince Rupert, BC to northern California, with a slight variations in decreased rainfall due to rain shadows. Incessant cloudiness and rain typical of this part of the world in the winter are not typical of a mediterranean climates, even with the increased rainfall in the winter months. The summer months, although drier and sunnier, do not typically have the consistent intense sunlight and dry air.
Refer to Victoria for some resolution in this matter. Even Tourism Victoria (they wouldn't be biased, would they?) refers to Victoria's climate as "sub-Mediterranean".207.6.233.23917:15, 18 August 2006 (UTC)
Actually, the difference in vegetation and climate between Prince Rupert and Victoria is obvious even at a glance. Victoria gets around 24 to 30 inches of precip per year (depending on location), whereas Prince Rupert gets about 100 inches. To put that in perspective, southern France and Rome both get around 30 inches. Prince Rupert experiences no summer drought whatsoever, while Victoria experiences a fairly severe summer drought, even by Mediterranean standards (drier than Rome or Marseilles in July and August? Yes) The difference between Victoria and Prince Rupert is HUGE. And of course the vegetation is thus completely different. Southeastern Vancouver Island has sclerophyllus broadleaf evergreen forest and oak parkland, Prince Rupert has temperate rainforest. The difference is entirely due to latitude and orographic (rainshadow) factors...As far as Victoria receiving incessant winter rain, that's more of a colloquialism than actual meteorological fact...check your weather statistics, or read the Koppen climate classification categories, and fit the Victoria data into that model..and voila, you'll get a Csb climate (classic cool Mediterranean climate). The same is not true of Vancouver, Seattle, or Portland by the way. Comment by user:24.64.223.203, 22/08/06.
Herein the problem lies... strictly using the Koppen climate classification, even Vancouver falls into the Csb category! Victoria's climate is more like Torquay or Paris than classic Mediterranean locations. When is the last time it snowed 200mm in Rome or San Francisco? It did in Victoria a couple of years ago, and it has from time to time as far back as I can remember. The temperature drops to 12 C at night in the middle of August. The rain is distributed as sporadic showers over several days even in summer (Think back to two weeks ago- it rarely goes more than a few weeks without the interruptiuon of several days of cool rain). The total precipitation is similar to Rome or Marseilles in summer, but these places get their rain in a few hours... not weeks. The weather patterns are different, the sun's intensity is different, and the summers are very predictably free of rain except for the odd thundershower. In a nutshell, I don't care what the Koppen climate classification says, it cannot call the climate of Victoria the same as the Mediterranean basin! I believe Grant65 is correct in his assessment of Victoria's climate- it is mediterranean-like.207.6.233.23916:51, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
1) Actually, Vancouver does not qualify as a Csb. Victoria does.
2) Victoria's climate is decidedly NOT like that of Paris, which sees rainfall evenly spread throughout the year with a slight maximum in the spring/summer (the exact opposite of Victoria).
3) Your point about snow is conceded.
4) As far as cool summers are concerned...as I've said, many med climate areas experience cool summers -- ever been to San Francisco in July?
5) As to precipitation - the numbers again bear me out! According to Environment Canada, Victoria's average number of days with precipitation >0.5mm in July and August is approximately one day per month. >0.2mm (or, essentially nothing) = 5 days per month. Again, this is equivalent to places such as Marseilles or Rome.
Okay. It seems to me that the most widely accepted of all "classification" systems for climate is still Koppen, despite its flaws. Since Csa and Csb climates are subtropical dry-summer climates, here is a chart indicating their presence in the Pacific Northwest. Now to me, this chart is a little generous, but it certainly corroborates what I've said and is from about as reliable a source as possible. http://snow.ag.uidaho.edu/Clim_Map/koppen_usa_map.htm I don't have all day to keep looking up Koppen maps that show enough detail on the PNW region, but you get the drift 24.84.208.24621:35, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Those sources support saying in the article that the area has a 'Mediterranean-like' climate. The sources trump all analysis of maps, rain patterns etc. -- Donald Albury02:38, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I'm referring to a book by Trewartha-An Introduction to Climate 4th edition by McGrawHill Book Company
As originally classified by Koppen's classification of climates, CS climate covered Western Oregon,W.Washington,SW British Columbia, and eastward from W. Oregon about 44-46 degrees North east to cover much of Idaho. Later climatologist like Trewartha and others had to modify the menu by adding: at least 8 months must have average temperatures of 50F and above and the average annual precipitation must not exceed 35 inches . These 2 additons pretty much caused the original Koppen classification to cover only low altitude California. The precipitation regime of the US Pacific northwest like Seattle or Portland is unusual and is actually more proper to classify it as Temperate Oceanic like that of London, UK or Amsterdam. Depending on your point of view, Western Europe has no dry season, the entire lowlands of far Western CS, CFC climates of the US has virually no thunderstorms while Western Europe has many.--Daysaregreat (talk) 18:02, 12 June 2009 (UTC)
About the sources. The first source listed does not say that Victoria has a "mediterranean-like" climate. It says that Garry Oak
"ecosystems occur within a distinctive climatic zone: a near-Mediterranean' climate." (Emphasis added.)
It also clearly makes a distinction between the mediterranean climate that is typical for Garry Oaks and the one place they grow which isn't a mediterranean climate:
"Their ability to survive on rapidly drained soils, on steep south and westfacing slopes, and on sites with exposed bedrock, subject to periodic fires, accounts for their present distribution in today’s Mediterranean-type climate. The important exception is the deep-soil parkland of southeastern Vancouver Island." (Emphasis added.)
In other words, Garry Oak ecosystems occur in mediterranean climates with one important exception that being "southeastern Vancouver Island," which apparently doesn't have a mediterranean climate for the Garry Oaks. So, it appears that Victoria doesn't even meet the criteria according to the government of Canada, in the resources that Donald provided.[2] This is one of those issues that I think is beyond the scope of Wikipedia, resolving disputes for boards of tourism. I'll look at the other resources as time goes on, but it would have been with more effort had the first been a clear-cut hit. KP Botany00:05, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
Do you have a published source that says that Victoria does not have a "Mediterranean-like" climate? User 24.84.208.246 has found sources that describe the southeastern coast of Vancouver Island as having a "Mediterranean-like" climate. Any analysis of the weather patterns in the area that has not been published by a reliable source is original research, and can't be used in WP. It is therefore legitimate to say that the southeast coast of Vancouver Island has been described as having a "Mediterranean-like" climate, citing the sources found by User 24.84.208.246. Remember, our verifiability policy says, "The threshold for inclusion in Wikipedia is verifiability, not truth." -- Donald Albury13:00, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
If you're wondering why I'm so adamant about this, I actually have two friends who went to live in the Vancouver-Victoria area because they couldn't stand Australian summers! I'm not disputing that real estate agents, tour guides and civic leaders are talking up Victoria B.C.'s climate. "Mediterranean-like" or "sub-Mediterranean" may be reasonable but they do not = Mediterranean. That is the point. If we mentioned every city/region/micro-climate with a "Mediterranean-like" or "sub-Mediterranean" climate, the article would be 10X as big. Grant65 | Talk13:54, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
"If we mentioned every city/region/micro-climate with a "Mediterranean-like" climate, the article would be 10X as big." (Grant65). Actually, I can't think of another place in the world aside from the 5 established med zones, and parts of the US/Canadian Pacific Northwest, that match the criteria of a strong summer dry season and mild rainy winters. If you can think of one, I'd be glad to hear it.24.84.208.24619:56, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
It is the Province of British Columbia Ministry of Environment, Lands and Parks describing the climate of southeastern Vancouver Island as "Mediterranean-type" and "near-Mediterranean"[3], Canadian Geographic describing the climate as "Mediterranean-like"[4] and the Wilderness Committee describing the climate as "Mediterranean-style".[5] Personal experiences and reports from friends do not count in Wikipedia, as they constitute original research and do not come from published reliable sources. It is all about the sources, and the sources are there to say that southeastern Vancouver Island has a "Mediterranean-like/type/style/etc." climate. -- Donald Albury00:33, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
Donald, once again, "near-Mediterranean, "Mediterranean-like", "sub-Mediterranean" and similar terms mean that it is not Mediterranean per se. One citation from the BC Ministry of Environment saying SE Vancouver Island is "Mediterranean-type" is not enough.
24.84, I'm not going to speculate on which other regions might want to claim a Mediterranean climate. Suffice to say there would be plenty of places with a "strong summer dry season and mild (no-one in this neck of the woods would call -5°C mild, because it never, ever gets that cold in this Mediterranean zone) rainy winters" and none of them are Mediterranean. Because it is a specific thing. For instance the map I posted below even excludes Adelaide and western South Australia, which are generally said to have a med climate. Adelaide has cool winters and dry summers from hell.Grant65 | Talk10:40, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
There are very, very few areas in the world with a summer dry season - it is the rarest precipitation pattern you will find. Aside from the med climate zones we've discussed, I can't think of a single example (and my knowledge on this is fairly substantial). The only possible examples are areas of the Middle East and western Asia, east of the med sea, which experience a summer dry season. However, these areas tend to be very dry throughout the year, including the winter, and therefore are best described as steppe or desert climates, and are not med.
Adelaide, I believe, does fall into the med climate zone area of Australia, regardless of what that map says. Its summers are moderately dry although not as dry as those of Victoria.
As far as temps of -5 never being recorded in a med climate zone...that is purely false. Temps as low as -5 and plenty lower have been recorded throughout the med many many times. Marseilles has hit -17C, Athens has hit -11C as recently as 2004. Again, the med climate is NOT even close to a tropical climate. Although there may be some med climate zones in the souther end of the range (ie. southern California, north Africa, south Africa, and perhaps your part of Australia) which have never hit -5C, this is not at all a criterion for inclusion in the med climate zone.24.84.208.24618:04, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
As an example of how ridiculous it is to strictly interpret the Koeppen classification, the articles on Portland and even Seattle now refer to their respective climates as "Mediterranean" (Come on now! Seattle??!!). All of these cities are in the Oceanic climate regime- look at any Koeppen map in any school textbook instead of analysing and interpreting the data to suite some sort of fantasy. Portland has some mediterranean characteristics, as does Victoria to a lesser degree (at least the summers in Portland are longer and warmer), but they are not "Mediterranean". 66.183.217.3122:53, 16 February 2007 (UTC)
Seattle as a mediterranean climate is conceptually interesting--does this mean I can now count on it not raining for the rest of the summer, not just SeaFare week? KP Botany00:10, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Maybe it's global warming in action :-D What with the Pacific Northwest boosters and the people determined to add every postage stamp sized area with a "dry" summer, this article is getting out of hand. I'm not sure these guys would be so enthusiastic about the concept if they actually lived in a classic Med zone...months of dead/moribund vegetation that has to be watered by hand because of water restrictions and scorching hot winds/dust storms anyone? Grant | Talk05:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Gee, are you implying the grass is green in the summer in Seattle? It's simply stunning to me having spent summers in Seattle as a kid that anyone who has ever been to both Seattle and Alameda County with its brown grass hills could possibly see any climatic relationship between the two indicating they both have arid summers. Seattle is not a mediterranean climate, it rains in the summer there--lawn grass is green in the summer, not vanilla pudding scorched dung like my summer yard in Fallbrook. Ten years ago we got a summer thunderstorm in the Central Valley, people are still talking about it. Would a summer thunderstorm in Seattle occassion such interest? Yes, trying to use a Wikipedia article to promote tourism simply shows desperation--Seattle should start advertising the "bluest skies and brownest grasses you've ever seen are in Seattle." KP Botany19:36, 18 February 2007 (UTC)
Hmm, don't know what version of Seattle you were living in!! Grass here turns dead brown by the end of June unless irrigated, and remains so until October or November. Sorry to burst your bubble. The same is true for Victoria (but even more so, since Victoria is drier). The only part of the PNW that I think is truly "med-like" is the Olympic Rainshadow zone from Victoria to the southern Gulf Islands to the San Juans. It's a pretty small area but is very unique and deserves recognition.66.183.95.29 (talk) 07:57, 30 June 2008 (UTC)
I just read on the Biome page the claim: most regions of the earth receive most of their rainfall during the summer months; Mediterranean climate regions receive their rainfall during the winter months. Is this true? If so, the Seattle and Victoria area are an exception and "Mediterranean-like" in being winter-wet and summer-dry. Although I've usually seen the region described as "marine west coast climate" rather than Mediterranean, the wet-winter dry-summer pattern is definitely a major factor. If it is truly a very rare pattern then the marine west coast climate has something unusual in common with the Mediterranean climate. At least, that is my understanding of why the region's climate is sometimes called Mediterranean-like, sub-Mediterranean, etc. Clearly it is colder than California. But there is a normal summer drought condition. As for green grass in Seattle in the summer, perhaps it is the constant watering of parks and lawns that does the trick -- without regular irrigation watering or some kind of wet micro-climate, lawn grass goes dormant and turns brown and dry in Seattle, just like in California. Pfly04:13, 9 April 2007 (UTC)
"Victoria has a sub-Mediterranean [i.e not "Mediterranean"; emphasis added] climate[1][2], with mild, rainy winters and warm, dry summers. Daily temperatures rise above 30 °C on an average of one or two weeks per year and fall below -5 °C on an average of only 2 nights per year. During the winter, the average daily high and low temperatures are 8.2 °C and 3.6 °C, respectively. The summer months are equally mild, with an average high temperature of 19.6 °C and low of 11.3 °C . Victoria does occasionally experience more extreme temperatures. The highest temperature ever recorded in Victoria was 35.3°C on July 23, 2004, while the coldest temperature on record was -15.6 °C on December 29, 1968."
Erhem...speaking as one who lives in a classic Med climate, being Perth, Western Australia, I have to say that Victoria B.C. doesn't sound Mediterranean. It simply doesn't sound warm enough. Perhaps this is akin to claims by some English people that Cornwall is Mediterranean, which it isn't. For example, the temperature in Perth almost never goes below 0°C in winter (June-August) and is frequently above 35°C in summer (December-February); we usually have at least one day per year over 40°C. Grant65 | Talk15:40, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
Mediterranean climates don't have to be hot in the summer. You live in one version of a mediterranean climate, but there are other types (for instance, the central coast of California which is bone-dry all summer but also foggy and cool). Cornwall is a stupid example as it doesn't even have the dry summers that are the most important characteristic of a med climate.24.85.35.167 (talk) 19:15, 20 July 2010 (UTC)
High summer temperatures are not necessary for a climate to be classified as med. See cool-summer places such as San Francisco, coastal Morocco or Portugal, etc. Cornwall certainly isn't Mediterranean, however, on that we can agree!24.84.208.24611:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
There is no part of the Pacific Northwest that has a true Mediterranean climate. Except during drought years, the Pac Northwest north of about Cape Mendocino in California receives rain all year long, albeit less in summer than winter. Besides the odd monsoonal thundershower, California gets no rain at all from any midlatitude storms during the summer. If Vancouver is dry, it's because of a local rain shadow, not a Mediterranean climate regime. Tmangray04:55, 23 August 2006 (UTC)
If you check Environment Canada's website, http://www.climate.weatheroffice.ec.gc.ca/climate_normals/index_e.html, you will see that Victoria experiences very dry summers, drier in fact than Marseilles or Rome, as I have mentioned. It is also drier, year round, than Cape Mendocino. However, it is cloudier in the winter months than most med climates, and colder; those are the only factors that really separate it in terms of climate. The cool summers do not factor in - San Francisco is a perfect example of a med climate with cool summers. And Victoria receives ample sunshine in the summer months, as much as 300+ hours in July, making it one of the sunniest cities in Canada in that month.24.84.208.24611:23, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
As noted above, dryness and sunshine aside, it's the temperatures that really mark Victoria, BC as not being Mediterranean. Melbourne isn't a true Med climate either, due mostly to temperature, but even it is substantially warmer than Victoria, British Columbia. Grant65 | Talk17:52, 22 November 2006 (UTC)
Melbourne isn't a true med climate either "due mostly to temperature"? Really? Yet Melbourne's winter temperatures are about the same as Naples, Athens, Rome, Marseilles, San Francisco, etc? Hmmm. I guess none of those are med either? I wonder just what a med climate truly is, because apparently it doesn't actually exist around the med sea. I think the problem is that a lot of you folks have a strange idea of what a med climate is, gleaned perhaps from movies or something? A med climate is NOT tropical, is NOT dry/sunny year round, and is NOT a desert. It has cool, rainy winters (sometimes with occasional frost and snow), and summer drought. Temps in summer can be hot (inland) or quite cool (near the coast). Aside from that, I would love to see someone present some reliable sources indicating otherwise. 24.84.208.24621:03, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
Melbourne is NOT a Mediterranean climate as it has no dry season. The type climate would be considered CFb or a marginal CFa,
humid subtropical, no dry season. Because Melbourne is located on a much smaller landmass than Eurasia,North America and Australia lacks very high mountain ranges that can effective block maritime airmass from the other coasts, the range of temperatures between summer and winter will be less. Melbourne will at times be hit by hot,dry airmass several times a year during the summer from the dry interior, with temperatures hitting +110F 43C with highest observed 116F 47C
Melbourne should not be included as a Mediterranean climate --Daysaregreat (talk) 20:13, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
Check the map on the right. Melbourne is right where the word "Victoria" appears (bottom right on the mainland), ironically enough. Try the resources at the Australian Bureau of Meteorology,[[6]} which classifies Melbourne as "no dry season (warm summer)", as distinct from hot and dry summers in the Mediterranean zones. I have never seen Melbourne classified as anything other than a classic temperate climate, in common with its neighbour across Bass Strait, Tasmania. Grant65 | Talk01:41, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
I admit to knowing next to nothing about Melbourne's climate, I just took a look at the average temperatures there, because you were suggesting that it was too cold to be mediterranean (I think). Now that I look at precipitation patterns, you're right, there is no summer dry season. Melbourne definitely isn't med. 24.84.208.24619:45, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
By the way, I think it's been stated repeatedly that hot summers are not a requirement to be classified as med. For instance, San Francisco has a textbook med climate (literally, it is in my climatology textbook)). Average July high temp is only 22 Celsius. The only way in which Victoria, BC doesn't match the traditional med climate is winter temperatures, which are slightly cooler than should be expected (although not by much, if you look at winter temps for the French Riviera, they're not much warmer). Aside from that, I can't think of any differences.24.84.208.24619:50, 27 November 2006 (UTC)
The mediterranean climate is also a function of currents, not just temperatures and rainfall, and this probably boils down to issues of the impact of the northern California Current System on Victoria. I know it starts at about the Straights of Juan de Fuca, but the question is, how much impact? Also, Victoria has, as far as I know, a subpolar flora, although I know gardeners from there who can grow a lot more than can grow in Seattle. The article is in need of more research and more information. KP Botany00:42, 28 November 2006 (UTC)
To have a mediterranean climate, you need (1) the coldest month to have a mean temperature (day/night average) of over 2C, (2) the hottest month needs to have a mean temperature of over 22C, and you need to have a marked decrease in rainfall during the hottest months. Victoria BC meets (1) and (3), but not (2), as Victoria's highest MEAN temperature in July/Aug is about 17C. I think there are some interior parts of Oregon, Pacific NW which meet all three requirements.
So far it has snowed 3 or 4 times this year in Victoria and has "stuck" for extended periods of days. Furthermore, Victoria has experienced 2 artic outlows this year where temps diped below minus 10. This is harldly indicative of a Mediterranean climate, let alone Mediterranean "like". People who live in TRUE Mediterranean climates( L.A., Perth, Athens ) must be getting a good laugh out of the Victoria article
The map is bollox, someone scan the original and then photoshop it to get the outlines. PLus the purple bits are not needed inbetween the two climate lines. --Globe0119:51, 22 March 2007 (UTC)
The article at the bottom of the page on global warming causing cyclones in the Mediterranean, is very brief and not descriptive. Can this point be extended or even removed? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 124.171.88.28 (talk) 09:32, 19 August 2007 (UTC)
Systems other than Köppen
Perhaps a lot of the confusion and debate over the meaning of "Mediterranean climate" stems from this page's use of the Köppen classification system only. I just posted something on the general topic at Talk:Oceanic climate#Climate or climate type?. This page seems better at making it clear that "Mediterranean climate" is a general term first, then explains its meaning in the Köppen system in a section dedicated to that purpose. However, as far as I can see, the rest of the page continues to rely on Köppen as if there was no other method of climate classification. Köppen may be the most commonly used system, but there are others--some using quite different frameworks and yielding different results. Debates over what places do or do not have a Mediterranean climate might become clearer if other classification systems were mentioned and the differences between them about what the "Mediterranean climate type" is made clear--ideally with maps. Unfortunately, Wikipedia lacks decent pages about climate classification systems other than Köppen. Maybe that shortcoming is the place to start. Perhaps I'll try to make a page about the Strahler and Oliver climate classification system. I have some info about it. It would be nice if Wikipedia had more about the Thornthwaite system, which I have less info about. Apparently there is also a scheme devised by Terjung in 1966, which sounds interesting, from what little info I have at hand. Pfly (talk) 21:09, 6 October 2010 (UTC)
Pfly, you are correct in that there other climate classification systems, even if the Köppen system is the most widespread. The problems with Köppen are too vast to be overlooked (All "subtropical" zones seem to be problematic, amongst other things), but it is arguably the de facto "first source" reference for all climate related issues, especially here on WP. It doesn't have to be that way. Even Trewartha's modified versions are, in my opinion, a huge improvement. This Spanish study is perhaps the best system I've come across, but it's application has a limited geographical scope and locations outside Europe are not fully covered. Nonetheless, it at least it makes an effort to break the broad generic bioclimatic zones into various subgroups- for example you will find a Temperate Oceanic group with a "Mediterranean subtype" (i.e. Bordeaux or Seattle), in contrast to the Oceanic with a "Humid" (i.e. UK). Madrid falls into a Mediterranean "UPPER MESOMEDITERRANEAN LOW DRY" category, in contrast to places like Cordoba wich are "Upper Dry" or most places in Galicia which are "TEMPERATE HYPEROCEANIC (SUBMEDITERRANEAN)". I could go on, but thankfully I wont... you get the picture! Koppenlady (talk) 22:18, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Yes, Köppen is not the only reference. But it remains probably the most synthetic one with objective criteria. The map of the Spanish study does not seem so different of the Trewartha's work : Madrid is again and still mediterranean...And about subtropical climates, you're right, simply because the concept of subtropical is a transition in its own (regions of Seattle, New-York, Milano...). But you will never find a perfect classification. There will be always some criteria which will challenge the general by the exception. --Milkcrawler (talk) 13:48, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Major Issues with Continental Mediterranean Climate Section
This section has become very confusing (if it was not already). If we’re going to define Continental Mediterranean Climate strictly as Dsa, Dsb or Dsc climates then we need to recognize the following as true: A) A Dsa, Dsb or Dsc climate indicates climates whose average temperatures during its coldest month are at least below freezing. B) Both Dushanbe and Tashkent do not fit this category, as average temperatures in these two cities during the coldest month is clearly above freezing. C) Based on these criteria, the only city currently on the list that clearly fits under this category is Ankara. D) Interior Spanish cities such as Madrid, which apparently can get snow almost every winter, must be classified as a Mediterranean climate.
If we elect to go with the original definition, which would include Dsa, Dsb and Dsc climates as well as Mediterranean climates that feature definite continental influences then we need to recognize the following as true. A) A large chunk of interior Spain, including Madrid fits under this category and there are a number of sources that support this [7]. [8][9] B) Dushanbe and Tashkent fits under this category. C) Areas with this climate must feature chilly to cold winters (but not below -3 C during its coldest month) and warm to hot summers.
I must admit, the fact that the two Central Asian cities have some form of a Mediterranean climate is truly surprising. G. Capo (talk) 22:02, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
I advocate that we define continental Mediterranean climates as either Dsa or Dsb (I have never seen Dsc and Dsd referred to as continental/subarctic Mediterranean), as this is more systematic and objective; we could argue and argue all day about what "definite continental influences" actually means, but the criteria for climates to be classified as Dsa, Dsb or Dsc are already well defined, and it is only these climate types that I have consistently seen being referred to as "continental Mediterranean".
As a side note, I too was surprised by this, but it makes sense that Dushanbe and Tashkent feature Mediterranean climates, as they are in the right latitudes to be affected by the subtropical ridge that creates Mediterranean climates and the subtropical deserts. The fact that they aren't even Continental Mediterranean climates can be explained by seeing that the mountains to their north block cold polar/continental air masses. Hooray for run-on sentences. 1brettsnyder (talk) 22:38, 3 August 2010 (UTC)
This sub-article is really going into a downward spiral! The term "Continental Mediterranean Climate" is a Wikipedia invention (there is not a single academic article that supports this term). Usually, WP inventions are nonsense or POV, but in this case it made sense to me: parts of the Mediterranean climate regime which, because of inland location or higher altitude, exhibit Continental climate features (such as colder and often snowy winters and aberrant precipitation patterns). Let's call it "Continental Mediterranean"... fine... so long as we don't forget they are still Cs climate locations! The Ds climates that are being pushed as "Continental Mediterranean" are nothing but a type of Continental climate and have no place in this article! —Preceding unsigned comment added by Koppenlady (talk • contribs) 18:32, 4 August 2010 (UTC)
I'm inclined to agree with Koppenlady on this. By the way, I was wrong about Ankara. The average high temperature during its coldest month is 1 not -1. This means the average temp in that month is -2.5 C. That makes it a C climate. Also due to their precipitation patterns, Dushanbe and Tashkent are both Mediterranean climates. Tashkent in particular is not quite a Cont. Med climate, though it's close. If there's no objections, I'll clean up the section in about 24 hours. G. Capo (talk) 16:39, 6 August 2010 (UTC)
The notion of continental mediterranean has no sense and does not exist in the Köppen classification. Madrid has a complete mediterranean climate (http://www.city-data.com/forum/attachments/weather/56180d1263187925-ultimate-climate-poll-koppen-climate-classification-kottek_et_al_2006.gif), nothing to do with central Asia where the winters are cold enough to be called "continental". It sounds like if the central spanish people would not want to be mediterranean. I purpose to delete it, because there is no source to confirm it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.161.11.212 (talk) 20:42, 10 September 2010 (UTC)
It seems to have a consensus about the question, here. I delete this section which is a complete original research.
Other edit : for Köppen, Galicia is mediterranean, that is all. Saying that "in general" this region is qualified as oceanic, is unsourced, and wrong according to the most reliable source.--Milkcrawler (talk) 19:02, 28 September 2010 (UTC)
Whoa, wait a minute. No consensus has been reached here. While this can be construed as POV, there is a general logic behind having a "Continental Mediterranean Climate". See Koppenlady's explanation. There are three differences between a "Continental Mediterranean Climate" and a Mediterranean Climate; differences in the precipitation pattern, the altitude, and the colder winters that regularly feature snowfall. This is not about folks in Madrid wanting to be different from other places. G. Capo (talk) 16:32, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
I've never been a supporter of a separate "Continental Mediterranean" category, especially when some people try to apply that title to a Ds designation, but please do not simply delete the information. There is no doubt that there are areas of Cs climate that exhibit "continental" features as explained above. I think the problem is the appearance of a new climate type when, in fact, it's a sub-type. And by the way, Koeppen does not distinguish- so this is pretty much only a description of data.Koppenlady (talk) 18:43, 29 September 2010 (UTC)
"There are three differences between a "Continental Mediterranean Climate" and a Mediterranean Climate; differences in the precipitation pattern, the altitude, and the colder winters that regularly feature snowfall. "
Wrong. Just an example : According to your assertion, Orange in Provence and Madrid are in different situations. But if you look at the diagrams, Orange and Madrid have exactly the same profile (mean t° 6°C in january, 24° in July, dry summer).
That is why Köppen has classified them as simply "mediterranean". The "continental" feature that you are talking about does not exist. It can be a local feature, but in an academic way, it remains an original theory. Maybe you could find colder winters in some mediterranean areas, but it will have nothing to do with any "continental" feature, but more with altitude (ex: Anatolian peninsula, hinterland of Provence...).
Once again, I suspect this invention to come from some spanish wiki users. If you look at the article "Spain", in the climate section, you will see that the term "mediterranean" diseapears in the legend of the picture for central Spain, by magy would I say. It remains only the expression "continental climate", which is obviously wrong. This mascarade should stop, and those original research have to be deleted.
"There is no doubt that there are areas of Cs climate that exhibit "continental" features as explained above...in fact, it's a sub-type."
There is no source which talk about it, or confirms it. So, it is an original research.
"And by the way, Koeppen does not distinguish"
This is exactly what I think. That's why this section must me deleted. Personal descriptions or ananlysis have to be suppressed--Milkcrawler (talk) 14:41, 2 October 2010 (UTC)
Milkcrawler, I'm mostly in agreement with you, but I believe the section should remain in a re-worked format. My selection of the word "sub-group" was perhaps misleading. I would suggest renaming the section "Highland Mediterranean characteristics" or something of that line, so as to avoid any suggestion that this is a separate climatic group (or even a sub-group). To call it "continental" is incorrect in that it's completely different forces that shape a Continental climate. All references to "continental" should be removed.
There are variations in the precipitation pattern and temperatures, due to altitude and inland distance, so this should not be overlooked. The data can be described without any OR. Madrid just happens to be the largest city to fit this characterisation; but as you point out, there are many other locations (such as the interior of Provence) that also fit this. Are we all in agreement then? Koppenlady (talk) 18:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)
I didn't watch this discussion, I see you are having fun here... so you don't find literature regarding this kind of climate...conclusion: it is an invention, how fun. You don't find ENGLISH literature regarding this issue, because all academic work comes from SPAIN where this kind of climate is clearly described. It seems that for you only Koppen exists, other studies must be dismissed as inventions. Some references, IN SPANISH I'm affraid:
"I would suggest renaming the section "Highland Mediterranean characteristics" or something of that line, so as to avoid any suggestion that this is a separate climatic group (or even a sub-group)"
Yes, I think it is a good idea.
"There are variations in the precipitation pattern and temperatures, due to altitude and inland distance, so this should not be overlooked."
I'm afraid you are playing on a sliding ground before falling in the O.R. It is indubitable that altitude plays a rule on the temperatures and the precipitations pattern in those regions. But the opposition inland/coast is not really systematic.
For example, you can see that Burgos, more in the inland than Marseille, has however as much precipitations. Due to the altitude and the influences of the Atlantic waves.
Idem by comparing Tessalonik near the sea (about 450mm) and Cuenca in the inland (about 500mm), probably because of the shelter effect for the Greek city :
In fact, in all those regions, the cumulation is low, between 400 and 700 mm. The annual amount of precipitation is low both in continental and Mediterranean areas, because of a seasonal permanent anticyclonic air masse : in winter for the first, in summer for the second.
In continental climates, the large inlands do not prevent of high amounts of precipitations in summer (ex : Toronto has more cumulation than London in summer). In the contrary, the Mediterranean feature is essentially defined by the summer drought, due to these permanent high pressures. So, the marked summer drought in Castilla reinforces the Mediterranean feature in this region. This summer drough is even more marked in Andalusia (compare Malaga and Madrid).
If there was any continental influence in Spain, the real consequences would be rather :
absence of summer drought
eventually dry winters
really cold winters, and not temperatures about 6°C like Madrid (which is "colder" than Barcelona rather due to the altitude than anything else)
Conclusion : talking about a continental influence by using the few amount of precipitation in summer is technically false.
"Madrid just happens to be the largest city to fit this characterisation"
Madrid is typically Mediterranean : mild in winter, hot and dry in summer. There is not any continental influence, here. Hence the Köppen classification.
Edit :
I don't want to soil your work, Koppenlady. Even if I think that this paragraph has nothing to do in wiki (too much OR), I have corrected anyway some of your edits :
clearing the "continental" influences which do not exist in fact (see post above).
The differences of temperatures that you notice come essentially from altitude.
talking about coldness in the inland is not really true (see Madrid not very different of Provence)
daily temperature above 30° in summer is frequent in a lot of places, even oceanic ones.
the snow is not more frequent in Madrid than anywhere else in Mediterranean regions. This sentance would be only true for the altitude.
I add sentances which clearly indicate that the "continental" influence is a typically spanish source, not really academic (the Dabeid's sources below are not academic) and controversial.
The map, according to these facts is wrong (lack of inlands of the most Mediterreanean regions). I did not do it, but I propose to delete it (OR). And once again, I think that this paragraph is border-line OR.
"Some references, IN SPANISH I'm affraid:"
First link : there is not any source or criteria to define the "clima mediterraneao continentalizado..."
Second link : I just see a a school project, not an academic source. By the way, the "continental" term is used p.2, but without any explanation (which criterion is used to define for Castilla a "continental influence") ? And don't say me that it is the amplitude about 16°, because this one is the same in the low plains of Provence too. Nor the -3°C isotherm, because this last exists only in high altitude in Spain.
Third link : completely amateur : saying that the winters in Castilla are "cold" with 6°C while they are the same as Provence has no sense. Not receivable.
Fourth link : amateur website.
Fiveth link : same link as the third.
Sixth link : amateur website (blog).
Please, do not flood the discussion with amateur weblinks, with doubloons-links or websites which just use the term "continental" without any explanation.
There is no point in discussing this when you are in denial. You despise any work that does not support your own view as amateur, including OFFICIAL websites from environmental agencies. Good work. David (talk) 10:39, 7 October 2010 (UTC)
Edit : Madrid has not more "extreme" climate than Provence or Languedoc, typical Mediterranean regions. Same temperature pattern (about 6-7°C in winter, 24-25 in summer). The continental mediterranean climate does not appear in any academic climate classification.
The continental mediterranean climate does not appear in any academic climate classification. Really? It was trivial to find many many academic and scholarly publications that use and define the term using just Google Books. Here's just the first few that came up:
Drought in Bulgaria, page 9, "[Bulgaria's] climate... ...the transitional nature of climate from temperate-continental in northern areas to continental-Mediterranean in the southern and eastern border areas." More on page 86.
Sage: the genus Salvia, page 44, "...Continental-Mediterranean climatic zones (A and B) [of Greece]..." Map on page 40.
International Congress on Silvopastoralism and Sustainable Management, page 110, ...gives a description of a specific site in Spain as having a continental Mediterranean climate.
Rivers of Europe, pages 450–451, describes in detail the differences between Mediterranean, Sub-Mediterranean, and continental Mediterranean climates, with examples in the Balkans region.
Vertebrate Conservation and Biodiversity, page 264, description comparing "Atlantic Mediterranean" and "Continental Mediterranean" climates in Portugal.
Vegetation ecology, page 118, Continental mediterranean climate described as a subtype of the Mediterranean climate according to "the genetic climate types of Walter (e.g. 1984, 1985)..."
The Black Sea flood question, page 455, "According to Velev (2002), the Bulgarian Black Sea coast exists within the Continental-Mediterranean climatic area..."; followed by description in terms of precipitation, temperatures, etc.
Climate change and groundwater, page 14, "...a transition from temperate climate to Mediterranean (continental–Mediterranean) climate."
These are just the first few, there are many more. Perhaps it is important to remember that the Köppen climate classification system is not the only way to talk about climate types. Pfly (talk) 21:03, 8 October 2010 (UTC)
Interesting links, but it would be better:
to give academic sources of climate classification with criteria
to not put pages only where you have found the expression "continental mediterranean" with no description. In your sources, the term is never used in a typology, nor technically described. It is a technical discussion, not literature.
In Klement Tockner's book, the expression "continental mediterranean" appears in two pages. In the second one, it is about "cold winters" in Guadiana region, a region where the mean temperature in January is about 8°C. Like the Côte d'Azur...
Southern Bulgary : indeed, we could speak about a continental influence (about 1° or 2°C in january). But it is a very restricted area, and nothing to do with Madrid or Guadiana for the winters.
you did not answer to the general problem : explain me why should we consider differently Central Spain, Provence and Languedoc, while they have all about the same temperature and precipitation pattern ? Once again, climatology is a science, not a copy-paste of expressions. So, I repeat again : the "continental Mediterranean climate" does not appear in any source of climatic classification.--Milkcrawler (talk) 13:48, 9 October 2010 (UTC)
Folks the "continental influence" on the Continental Mediterranean climate is the noticeable drier stretch in the middle of the winter. continental climates tend to have drier winters and wetter summers. It also tends to see some snowfall every winter. Typical Mediterranean climates do not see a drying rend in the middle of winter and most Mediterranean climates do not see snowfall every winter. That's a major reason why it's called a "Continental Mediterranean Climate".
As to what constitutes a "Continental Mediterranean Climate" There are four distinct characteristics...
1. It has a drying trend in mid-winter and peaks of precipitation in the fall and spring.
2. Its winters are colder, though not "D-climate cold"
3. Regions with this subtype of a Mediterranean climate have some altitude.
4. Its evapotranspiration rate is low enough that it does not qualify as an arid or semi-arid climate.
If the city/area in question features ALL FOUR of these characteristics, it's a "Continental Mediterranean Climate". I must emphasize though, that this is a sub-type of a Mediterranean Climate, not its own separate climate. 162.84.237.204 (talk) 03:30, 12 October 2010 (UTC)
You are right on the whole. And you will notice that Central Spain does not match to this schema, excepted in altitude. Hence the precedent edits.--Milkcrawler (talk) 19:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
I’ve come back to find that this page has been altered somewhat. After looking at this discussion, I have a few observations
1. Continental Mediterranean climate is not a made up term, but is a term that is actually seen in several legitimate publications. It is a type of Mediterranean climate.
2. Provence and Languedoc are not cities but regions. What Milkcrawler has been arguing is somewhat equivalent to saying that the entire state of California has the same climate. In both instances, the state (or region) has different altitudes and geography. Let’s get a more specific place first, then we can discuss further. Forgive me, my French isn’t that good.
3. “Continental mediterranean climate” is a type of Mediterranean climate with continental influences. The continental influences are both the noticeable drying trend in mid-winter as the anon above posted and the colder winters, though not “D-climate cold”. Apparently these places see some snowfall every winter, a trait that most cities with this climate do not have.
4. Madrid is clearly not “typically Mediterranean”. For a Mediterranean climate, Madrid has the unusual precipitation pattern described above and it apparently features snowfall every winter. Your typical Mediterranean climate does not have this pattern.
5. Of all the Koppen climate types, the Mediterranean climate seems to be the most controversial, because it’s definition seems to vary. Climates in cities such as Porto and Podgorica and Victoria, British Columbia, just seem to bring chaos to the concept of Mediterranean Climate.
I can accept your suggestion, if that is the consensus, but with a caveat. If we are using Koeppen, there is no such thing- period. The same is true for Trewartha's version and most others. The references used in support are hardly unified, and I think there's a bit of liberal persuasion in the interpretations. My Spanish is pretty basic, but I think a more accurate translation of the Spanish references would be "continentalised" Mediterranean, as opposed to "continental climate". There is a difference of meaning. As for the English-language citations, again I think they are speaking in descriptive terms and at no point do the authors suggest a separate unified climate or even a subtype. Koppenlady (talk) 18:10, 14 October 2010 (UTC)
"Continental Mediterranean climate is not a made up term, but is a term that is actually seen in several legitimate publications."
It is not a term used in any academic classification. Hence this discussion. Your link does not give any technical description of the concept. Once again, it is useless to multiply links to books where you can find the expression if you have not any classification which shows it, or a clear description. Until here, only southern Bulgaria can match to this feature. The other places are either wrong like Madrid, either in altitude.--Milkcrawler (talk) 19:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
"Provence and Languedoc are not cities but regions. What Milkcrawler has been arguing is somewhat equivalent to saying that the entire state of California has the same climate. In both instances, the state (or region) has different altitudes and geography. "
I invite you to read again my comments. I have compared Provence and Languedoc with Central Spain, and Madrid with Marseille, Orange and Nîmes. So, I don't see where is your point. By the way, a comparison between Madrid with the hinterland of Provence would be even worse for the "continental Mediterranean" concept.--Milkcrawler (talk) 19:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
"The continental influences are both the noticeable drying trend in mid-winter"
Maybe, but it does not match to the diagrams of Central Spain. According to the Gaussen's law (taken by Köppen), there is not any drought in Madrid in winter, not even any drying trend. In fact, it is completely the contrary : the autumn and the winter tend to be the most humid seasons in Madrid, like in all the Mediterranean regions, again and again...--Milkcrawler (talk) 19:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
"Apparently these places see some snowfall every winter, a trait that most cities with this climate do not have...For a Mediterranean climate, Madrid has the unusual precipitation pattern described above and it apparently features snowfall every winter."
According to Aemet, the average annual number of days of snowfall in Madrid is 4. By comparison, it is 10 in Carcassonne (Languedoc), 4 for Nîmes, 3 for Nice, 3 for Orange, 3 for Perpignan...Nothing to do with a "cold" winter. For a comparison with an oceanic domain, it is 9 in Brest (Britanny) and 17 in Paris, where the winters are still mild .
The official French weather website does not give this criteria, but if you want, I can give you a link with the data for 1961-1990 in France.--Milkcrawler (talk) 19:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
"the Mediterranean climate seems to be the most controversial"
The Mediterranean climate is nowhere controversial, neither in Köppen's classification, nor in the others. What you are talking about is the limit of this domain which is sometimes controversial, and where the typical features do not match exactly (especially Csb domain). But we can say so about all the climatic domains. This is why using the exception to challenge the general is a kind of bad faith.--Milkcrawler (talk) 19:11, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
"Climates in cities such as Porto and Podgorica and Victoria, British Columbia, just seem to bring chaos to the concept of Mediterranean Climate."
Once again, focalising on the exceptions or the limits is not a very constructive behaviour.
Porto belongs to the Mediterranean domain because of the dry summers. The temperature in summer is less hot than in Csa, but it remains far hotter than "real" oceanic domain (19,5°C in july, nothing to do with NW Europe which is about 16-17°C).
For Podgorica (Montenegro), I don't see what you mean : the mean temperature in January is about 5,5°C (like Nîmes), and hot and dry in july (more rain in august).
Victoria's region has dry summers, but it is at the limit of the domain. Not far in the same region, the Cfb climate begins and the summer drought disappears (see Surray or Vancouver).--Milkcrawler (talk) 19:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
"I’d keep the Continental Mediterranean climate section, but would note that it’s a controversial classification."
I'm opposed for two simple reasons :
there is not any world academic classification which shows it. Even the map is false, so it will be soon deleted due to OR, unless someone is able to show a world academic classification with this sub-type...Good luck.
all the technical arguments on this talk page about it (Madrid should be cold, dry and snowy in winter...) are completely wrong, excepted for southern Bulgaria or altitude. --Milkcrawler (talk) 19:06, 15 October 2010 (UTC)
Edit :
the characteristics which are described in the section belong to a "highland" feature of the mediterranean domain. Some spanish authors use the term of "continental" but it does not appear in any world classification.
Madrid has not any continental feature. It is simply a mediterranean city, and technically proved ; idem for Burgos or Leon (3 or 4°C in january is not really "cold").
Csb are sometimes considered "ocenic", but not "generally", and not for Köppen
I will only respond to the main points of your argument. Attempting to respond to all of your sub-points will just take up too much of this page...
1. Look again at my source, the author states an area has Continental Mediterranean Climate and then describes the peaks of precipitation in the fall and late spring. The source is also academic. It's curious that several individuals have presented you with governmental sources discussing the Continental aspects of the Mediterranean climate and that certain cities have it. Yet, you seem to dismiss these documents out of hand. I'm going on a limb here, but I think government agencies also have legitimate scientists and climatologists.
2. Again the continental feature of the climate is not only the cold temperatures, but the drying trend that is seen in mid-winter. Continental climates tend to have wetter summers and drier winters. The winters tend to be colder. If you look at the charts of the cities under this category, precipitation first decreases then increases during the first four or five months of the year.
3. Okay, now I see your examples of cities...
A. According to Marseille's wiki page, it's peak of precipitation, is seen in the early winter (January) and October. That's takes it out of the Continental Med. category...barely.
B. Nimes, is the oddball climate that I can seen to find in English that fits this category. As you yourself have stated, "...focalising on the exceptions or the limits is not a very constructive behaviour". I'll address this quote later. Nimes fits a Continental Mediterranean Climate regime without the altitude. Apparently a large portion of Southern France is affected by colder winds during the winter. Apparently, the cold winds are from colder Continental areas. There is your source of the Continental influence on the Mediterranean climate there. It's not the altitude, but winds from colder areas that's causing these colder winters.
4. The Mediterranean Climate is the most controversial category. Here's why...
A. All the other climate types are pretty much clear cut. We use equations to determine arid and semiarid climates as well as tropical savanna and tropical monsoon climates. Tropical rainforest climates have no month that falls below 60mm of rain and it's tropical; humid subtropical climates, humid continental climates, subarctic climates and oceanic climates have definite temperature ranges, though a number of oceanic climates have some interesting drying trends. However the mediterranean category gets extremely murky here's how...
1) Mediterranean climates are thought to have a precipitation between about 400-700 mm. Yet cities such as Porto, Podgorica, Mostar, are clearly above this limit. Podgorica gets 1600 mm of precip annually, according to wiki, yet it's still considered a Med. climate?!? Split, Istanbul and a few other cities also receive more than 700 mm of precip., but the difference is not quite as spectacular as my first three examples.
2) On the flip side, we have Seattle, Portland and Victoria, B.C. which actually receives less precip than Porto, Podgorica and Morstar, but they're generally not considered Mediterranean. They all have comparable drying trends in the summer. If you argue it's colder, all three of these cities are C climates. They qualify. If you argue that the landscapes is not Mediterranean, Porto, Podgorica and Morstar do not have "Mediterranean landscapes". Apparently, Podgorica looks a lot like Seattle.
B. People have a preconceived notion of a Mediterranean climate. However, even that notion differs, depending on where you are located. San Francisco may at best have about one month where you can enjoy a warm day at the beach. Yet you will find few arguing that it's not a Mediterranean climate. It's not about "...focalising on the exceptions or the limits...", but a pattern of inconsistency when it comes to what constitutes a Mediterranean climate.
With all of this said, I believe that the category in question should be termed a Continentalized Mediterranean climate, or something similar. The colder, drying trend in the middle of winter surrounded by two definite peaks of precip is clearly not a normal Med. pattern. If any place features this influence, it should be categorized accordingly. G. Capo (talk) 02:09, 18 October 2010 (UTC)
"Look again at my source, the author states an area has Continental Mediterranean Climate and then describes the peaks of precipitation in the fall and late spring."
There is a description of the precipitations pattern, but not the temperatures (which average temperature in winter ?). And the technical description of the "drying trend" is not given either.
"Yet, you seem to dismiss these documents out of hand. I'm going on a limb here, but I think government agencies also have legitimate scientists and climatologists."
I don’t "dismiss" the professional qualities of each contributor of these sources. I just say that:
A blog can’t be a reference for a section
There is not technical description of the "continental" Mediterranean climate (which temperature limit ? Which criteria for the precipitations ?..).
There is not any world classification which mentions this sub-type
"Again the continental feature of the climate is not only the cold temperatures, but the drying trend that is seen in mid-winter."
I don’t deny it. I have already said that the diagrams of Madrid or Burgos don’t present any drying trend, it is exactly the contrary : the cold season tends to be the most humid one, in the contrary of any continental influence. And do not forget the temperatures : if you have no cold, you can’t speak about real "continental" influence.
"If you look at the charts of the cities under this category, precipitation first decreases then increases during the first four or five months of the year."
The decreasing that you are talking about is a common point of all the Mediterranean patterns.
If you consider the spring increasing as a feature to define the continental influence, you must admit that Marseille or Montpellier have the same "continental" influence and should be on the map and in the section. With southern France, this feature can also be found in Southern Bulgaria, NW Italy, Madrid region, Greece, Western Turkey...but not in central and southern Italy, western and southern Spain, Northern Africa or Middle-East.
In any case, whatever the interest to distinguish a "northern Mediterranean" area which would have colder and dryer winters, it remains an original research since no academic author has separated the sub-areas that we are talking about from the others.
"According to Marseille's wiki page, it's peak of precipitation, is seen in the early winter (January) and October. That's takes it out of the Continental Med. category...barely."
I don’t see any real difference between the precipitations peaks of Marseille and the Madrid’s one (peaks in late-autumn and mid-spring).
"Nimes fits a Continental Mediterranean Climate regime without the altitude."
Sorry, but this is an original research. According to the existing studies, Nîmes remains a complete Mediterranean city.
"Apparently a large portion of Southern France is affected by colder winds during the winter. Apparently, the cold winds are from colder Continental areas. There is your source of the Continental influence on the Mediterranean climate there. It's not the altitude, but winds from colder areas that's causing these colder winters."
It may be right. But it remains a very small nuance that you will be able to find in all the climatic areas. But we can’t speak about "colder winters" when the mean temperature in January is about 6 or 7°C. And there is no academic climate classification which support this theory.
"All the other climate types are pretty much clear cut."
You are probably joking. If you take the limit of each Köppen’s domain, you will be able to challenge it. See Poland, Transylvania or Melbourne region for the oceanic climate (Cfb), southern Manitoba or Ebre Valley for semi-arid climate (Bsk), humid subtropical for New-York region...
"We use equations to determine arid and semiarid climates as well as tropical…However the mediterranean category gets extremely murky here's how..."
Not murkly. As I know, Köppen has taken the Bagnouls-Gaussen’s law to determine the climatic drought, and to separate the Mediterranean climate (Cs) from the others. The 22°C isotherm of july makes the separation between the Csa and the Cfb or Csb climates.
"Mediterranean climates are thought to have a precipitation between about 400-700 mm."
You make a confusion. This is the summer drought which characterizes this climate, not the amount of the precipitations. Because this amount can be very different in a same domain (in Britain, ou can find areas with less than 600 mm and other ones with more than 1200 mm, idem in Provence etc...).
"With all of this said, I believe that the category in question should be termed a Continentalized Mediterranean climate, or something similar. The colder, drying trend in the middle of winter surrounded by two definite peaks of precip is clearly not a normal Med. pattern. If any place features this influence, it should be categorized accordingly."
If by continental influence, you mean real colder winters (and not mild ones like in Madrid), and real drought trend in winter, I would say yes, but only for Southern Bulgaria or small areas like this one (though this does not appear in any classification). Like I have said, all the other examples are either wrong (Madrid, Nîmes...), either in altitude.--Milckrawler (talk) 21:25, 22 October 2010 (UTC)
Edit :
add examples of Marseille, Nîmes and Madrid to support the fact that for Köppen and other authors, there is no difference between them.
change the place of the charts of Burgos, Leon, Madrid to match to the academic classifications
"You are probably joking. If you take the limit of each Köppen’s domain, you will be able to challenge it. See Poland, Transylvania or Melbourne region for the oceanic climate (Cfb), southern Manitoba or Ebre Valley for semi-arid climate (Bsk), humid subtropical for New-York region..."
I was discussing what constitutes a certain climate type, not so much borderline types. Cities can fall on the borders of two or even 3 different climate types (see Tianjin).
"Not murkly. As I know, Köppen has taken the Bagnouls-Gaussen’s law to determine the climatic drought, and to separate the Mediterranean climate (Cs) from the others. The 22°C isotherm of july makes the separation between the Csa and the Cfb or Csb climates."
Okay, if this is indeed true, the Bagnouls-Gaussen's law should be both mentioned and explained in the wiki article itself Mediterranean page. The formula should be spelled out. This would serve to improve the article.
"You make a confusion. This is the summer drought which characterizes this climate, not the amount of the precipitations. Because this amount can be very different in a same domain (in Britain, ou can find areas with less than 600 mm and other ones with more than 1200 mm, idem in Provence etc...)."
If that's true, then there should be language reflecting this in the Mediterranean wiki article. We probably should state something to the effect that Med. climates usually has 400-600 mm of precip., but can be as much as 1500 mm or even more.
I still am not fully convinced that a "Continental Mediterranean Climate" is a made up term, but you have some very compelling arguments. Maybe we should delete the entire subsection altogether...G. Capo (talk) 05:41, 6 November 2010 (UTC)
Yes, I think that it is the best solution. So, I delete the section. Anyway, since you are not "totally" convinced, I keep a paragraph which shows that the expression exists in some Spanish Academic litterature, though not in the academic classifications. I hope you will agree with it.
I put some precisions about the dryness and other minor ones.
Köppen had changed of method for the definition of the dryness. I give a source in French (see p.60). :
First, the condition for the dryness was that the amount of precipitations was below the third of the wettest month of winter. Köppen seemed to have changed of method in second, and a month is now considered as dry when the amount of precipitations is below the double of the temperature in Celsius degrees. Which is exactly the Gaussen's law, and this could explain why there is so confusions, and why the Cs areas match so well with this method. --Milkrawler (talk) 18:26, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
If this is indeed true, this would make more sense. I say "if" only because my French is terrible. If you have a source which says this in English, I'll gladly include this in the article. G. Capo (talk) 03:09, 19 November 2010 (UTC)
You are right to say "if", because I have mistaken on this precise point. Summarize :
several indexes exist since the mid-20th century (see De Martonne, Fournier, Thornwaite, Penman...)
after having isolated the "C" zones on earth, Köppen has defined the "Cs" zones where the summer is dry. In this zone, he stated that a summer month has to be considered as dry when this month has an amount of less of one third of the wettest month, and with precipitations under 30 mm. But if you keep this formula, current Csb zones do not match (especially in Galicia).
That's why I remain surprised by the "30 mm" about Köppen. If it is right, it would mean that his original works did never integrated NW Spain in the Mediterranean domain. But even in a former update (Lamb's one - 1972), Galicia was yet in the Mediterranean domain.
The Köppen's work has been updated several times, with different edits (especially Geiger). Each update of the Köppen's work uses indexes of aridity from different sources more or less known (with the Penman's law, you will laugh...).
Documentation is not very abundant to find the mathematical edits for each update, but for the most current maps :
1. The wiki Köppen derivative map comes from Australian searchers. They have replaced the initial (supposed) Köppen's summer maximum monthly precipitations amount of 30 mm by a level of 40 mm. So, with this criterion, the Mediterranean domain extends clearly to low-lands of actual Csb domain. While with 30 mm, Galicia would have been few concerned.
2. One of the well-known maps (below) : this Köppen's derivative work comes from German-Austrian searchers (see p.260 and 261). It is almost the same as the precedent, but with one more criterion (summer months minimum precipitations inferior to the winter months minimum precipitations).
It does not mean that those criteria are not censurable. For example, the first source has limited the continental domain with the coldest month isotherm 0°C instead of the original Köppen's -3°C one, which is completly arbitrary.
Despite what says the link I have posted, Köppen (and later Geiger) does not seem to have directly used the Bagnouls-Gaussen's law. I had seen it in other publications too, but I don't find them, so, I delete it.
Anyway, about the initial point (the definition of the Mediterranean climate), the final result is the same : the summer drought is the main feature to separate the Mediterranean domain from the others, whatever the index (you can try the Gaussen's law, it is the easiest to calculate with some basic data).
The only nuance which could exist is about the Csb zone. Some authors like Trewartha prefer to link it with the oceanic zone due lower summer temperatures, but the summer drought is well established : Galicia is a permanent risk-zone of forest fires (like almost all the Mediterranean regions), and has heavily suffered from foret fires in the 2000's. It seems that forest fires are regular too in the American North-western coastal areas.
Ankara does not have a Mediterranean climate according to Köppen classification. Categorizing it as such is false. It has a continetal mediterranean or just a dry-hot summer continental climate.
Ankara does not have a "pure" Mediterranean climate ("Csa" or "Csb"), according to Köppen climate classification. Categorizing it as such is false and misleading. It has a continetal mediterranean climate or just a dry-hot summer continental climate in which the Köppen climate classification is a borderline "Dsa" and "Dsb", appart from its precipitation pattern, due to its temperature pattern. Due to its fairly low annual precipitaiton of 415 mm it is also a close borderline cold Semi-arid climate ("BSk").
If Ankara's climate is just categorized as a "Mediterranean climate", it diverges from the specific criteria and categorization of this climate and adds further unnessecassry confusion about this topic, not just about the climate of one city.
Here is the climate graph of Ankara which provides a reason for further discussions not just on this city but on this climate type in general.
I've rechecked the weatherbase data on Ankara. Weatherbase has since pulled its annual precipitation data (either indicating it was wrong or needed to be recalibrated). In light of this, I used BBC annual climate data for Ankara. According to BBC's data, Ankara indeed has a semi-arid climate. The climate section for Ankara has been changed to reflect this fact G. Capo (talk) 16:01, 3 January 2011 (UTC)
Talca and "Los Andes" in Central Chile has "Hot-summer Mediterranean climate"
The city of Talca (35°26′0″S 71°40′0″W) in Central Chile, in the Maule Region has Hot-summer Mediterranean climate because has average monthly temperatures in excess of 21.8°C (72°F) during its warmest month, according to Wikipedia in English http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talca#Geography_and_climate or in spanish http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talca#Clima
In addition, the city of "Los Andes" (32°50′S 70°37′W) in the north of central Chile, in the Región of Valparaíso, is known to be hottest than Talca. The information of "Los Andes" from Wikipedia in Spanish is exaggerated ( http://es.wikipedia.org/wiki/Los_Andes_(Chile)#Clima ), but this serves to get an idea of the climate of "Los Andes".
The name of the climate "Mediterranean" is from the southern coast of Europe, northern of Africa and West Asia. Mediterranean climate has got hot summers, more than 22ºC in cities like Rome, Valencia, Athens, Alexandria, Tunis, Tel-Aviv, etc. Is the weather of the wine, of the olives and oil, etc. In cities like Seattle and Oporto the weather is oceanic with dry summer, but not hot. Is a climate betwen mediterranean and oceanic, but is not mediterranean. Only Csa is mediterranean, Csb is betwen Csa and Cfb. --84.120.9.91 (talk) 04:03, 27 June 2010 (UTC)
Despite the chilly summers for the latitude, San Francisco and Monterrey (California) are definitely Mediterranean in climate -- and distinctively subtropical. Palm trees thrive there, so it is ecologically subtropical.
The point: the region has a well-defined pattern of dry summers and moist winters, and the zone of Csa climate is comparatively close (like Walnut Creek, a suburb of San Francisco inland enough to be shielded from most oceanic breezes. San Francisco is part of a climatic zome that extends from at least Eureka to the shoreline of Greater Los Angeles. Indeed San Diego would be part of the zone if it weren't as dry as it is.
In California, the Csb climate along the coast isn't between "Csa" and "Cfb"; it is between either "Csa" (hot-summer norm) or BSHs (hot-summer semi-desert with a marked summer deficiency of rainfall) and the ocean. Pbrower2a (talk) 07:23, 27 February 2011 (UTC)
Sunshine duration in Csb areas
Edit : sunshine is higher in Csb areas than in Cfb. I don't take inland areas where the sunbright is even higher. We can't say that the sun never appears...
Cfb:
Brest, Dublin, Paris, Blackpool : about 1500-1600 hours
City lists and gallery-like section gone, per the Manual of Style
By request, I have swept in and wikified the article. In this article's case, that meant eliminating the city lists (which were not referenced anyway) and the gallery-like chart section at the end of the article, with two of the charts thrown into their respective sections. This brings the article into tolerance with wikipedia standards, and sets it up for improvement to GA, someday, once all the content has inline references. Thegreatdr (talk) 14:20, 3 April 2011 (UTC)
"Most large, historic cities of the Mediterranean basin, including Athens, Algiers, Barcelona, Beirut, İzmir, Jerusalem, Marseille, Rome and Tunis, lie within Mediterranean climatic zones, as do major cities outside of the Mediterranean basin, such as Lisbon, Casablanca, Cape Town, Adelaide, Perth, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Santiago de Chile, Tashkent, and Dushanbe."
DUSHAMBE???????????
Many towns in the list have not properly a mediterranean climate, but Dushambe?????
It's in the middle of central Asia, how can have a mediterranean climate? To define the climate of a region is necessary to consider not only medium temperatures, but also atmospheric pressure, humidity and other parameters.
A necessary condition of mediterranean climate is the sea, which regulates sea and land breezes.
Not even Jerusalem and Casablanca have a real mediterranean climate, but they are placed in arid areas,more or less it's the same about Perth.
While San Francisco and Cape town have a too humid climate to be classified as mediterranean.
"usually occur on the western sides of continents"
Technically the Csa climates extend rather far to the east along the southern shore of Australia -- but that is a "south coast" Mediterranean set of climates. If one considers Europe a continent, then at its latitude Greece is as far to the east as one can get and stay in Europe except for the European part of Turkey.
Otherwise a Cs climate could exist on the east side of a continent only on a rainshadow region whose topography selectively shuts out summer precipitation by not winter precipitation. The Appalachians are high enough to create rainshadow effects as on the Shenandoah Valley, but even there the effect is proportionate to all seasons. Such would be microclimates barely visible on the map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Pbrower2a (talk • contribs) 08:27, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
Seattle Vancouver and Portland are NOT Mediterranean
If this article was called Köppen CsB, we sure could include those cities. But it's not, the article is called Mediterranean climate. While the CsB may be correct for those cities, no one calls them Mediterranean. While the issue is properly discussed in the article, those places should be removed from the maps. D O N D E groovilyTalk to me12:53, 11 April 2012 (UTC)
That's right, the former map was crazy, and the new has been uploaded in the page is still crazy! Northern California, Oregon, Washington and southern British Columbia don't have mediterranean climate.
While about Italy I don't understand why adriatic areas aren't marked as mediterranean, Molise, Puglia, Abruzzo and Marche coasts have a mediterranean climate, Only the extreme northern tip of Adriatic sea is few colder.
But in any case all the studies about mediterranean climate are totally foolish, for example Los Angeles for me and all the people who live in Europe has a too much arid climate to be classified as mediterranean, and it's the same for Israel and Perth Area in Australia...for European standards their climates are semiarid, not mediterranean!
This map is IMO more realistic, though the borders of Calfornia and Mexico, western Australia, Lybia, great part of Morocco and Middle East are surely more arid and semiarid than real mediterranean areas.
I generally agree and have made changes to the article. The important thing to remember is that there is a difference between the lead, which describes general characteristics of a Med climate (characteristics TYPICAL of the Med Basin), and the section on Koeppen- TWO DIFFERENT THINGS in my mind, since this article is not just on the Koeppen climate. We clearly state that under the Köppen climate classification, "dry-summer subtropical" climates (classified as Csa and Csb) are often referred to as "Mediterranean" and then go on to explain why and the limitations- in particular to the climate of places like the Pacific Northwest where, although Cs under Koeppen, it's clearly NOT similar to the Mediterranean Basin. On the other side of the discussion, Adriatic areas of Italy (and even Florence!) do not meet the Cs criteria under Koeppen, even if considered Med by most people.
Now, regarding LA, Israel and Perth, I agree they are borderline semi-arid, but I also see them as typical of the Med Basin (Athens, Crete, Sicily, southern Spain- for example- are all similarily "semi-arid" but still Med).
You know would would stop most of this foolishness regarding what city was in which climate? Referencing! That's why it's included in the Manual of Style, and why this article is C class. Until this article is adequately referenced, there will be squabbling. Easy fix people. Thegreatdr (talk) 01:24, 10 August 2012 (UTC)
Not Brazil, but Chile
There's an important error in the introduction. In south America it's not central Brazil that has Mediterranean climate. It's central Chile. Brazil has either tropical climate or subtropical humid (east coast) climate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.28.51.244 (talk) 00:28, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
It's nonsensal. Eastern coasts of Spain have a mediterranean climate and it's the same for the countries which face Adriatic sea and the entirety of southern France, while it's simply ridiculous that someone could consider arid areas of central Turkey, Pakistan, Iran, Afghanistan and deserts of south California as places with a Mediterranean climate. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.12.216.36 (talk) 02:27, 23 October 2012 (UTC)
cities with mediterranean climate
"Most large, historic cities of the Mediterranean basin, including Athens, Algiers, Barcelona, Beirut, İzmir, Jerusalem, Marseille, Rome and Tunis, lie within Mediterranean climatic zones, as do major cities outside of the Mediterranean basin, such as Lisbon, Casablanca, Cape Town, Adelaide, Perth, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Santiago de Chile, Tashkent, and Dushanbe."
DUSHAMBE???????????
Many towns in the list have not properly a mediterranean climate, but Dushambe?????
It's in the middle of central Asia, how can have a mediterranean climate? To define the climate of a region is necessary to consider not only medium temperatures, but also atmospheric pressure, humidity and other parameters.
A necessary condition of mediterranean climate is the sea, which regulates sea and land breezes.
Not even Jerusalem and Casablanca have a real mediterranean climate, but they are placed in arid areas,more or less it's the same about Perth.
While San Francisco and Cape town have a too humid climate to be classified as mediterranean. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.39.118.100 (talk) 19:31, 5 December 2011 (UTC)
I know Dushanbe looks absolutely weird being on this list, but based on the climate data and utilizing Koppen’s parameters, it’s indeed Mediterranean. Dushanbe has no month where average monthly temperatures falls below -3 C or even 0 C, so it’s not a D climate. The city features wet winters and dry summers, with the driest summer month seeing about only 4/1000 the precipitation of the wettest winter month. This eliminates it from the humid subtropical climate category. Dushanbe’s warmest month average is well above 22 C, so it’s not any form of an oceanic climate. When you run the calculations for aridity (see semi-arid climate page for guidance on this) for Dushanbe, you’ll find that the climate is not quite semi-arid. Despite its decidedly unconventional location for a Mediterranean climate, Dushanbe has this climate. Also if run calculations for both Jerusalem and Casablanca, you’ll find that both of these cities fall under the Mediterranean climate category as well.
Finally, humidity is not really considered under Koppen’s system, we can have humid desert climates and relatively dry “humid subtropical climates”. G. Capo (talk) 15:34, 8 December 2011 (UTC)
I personally have my doubts about Central Asia. Not sure, but I've heard it is freezing cold there. Regarding other areas, ex. Casablanca, it's much more humid than one thinks of it. It is by an ocean. It has fogs, rainy winters and a relatively green landscape around. The desert in Morocco only begins after the Atlas mountains. The whole agricultural region of Morocco between the Atlas and the ocean is quite green, a lot greener than say much of Spain.
Anyway, semi-arid is borderline between Mediterranean and Desert climates. On the other border, aka, between Mediterranean climates and rainy marine climatates lie cities and regions such as Oporto, Galicia, Southwest of France, Northern California and Oregon, center/south of Chile (Chiloé Island). — Preceding unsigned comment added by 62.28.51.244 (talk) 00:43, 25 August 2012 (UTC)
You've heard, personal doubts etc. doesn't work here. Unless the data is wrong, based on Koppen's system, these places are Med. I think Capo's right here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.101.77.243 (talk) 20:59, 1 January 2013 (UTC)
San Francisco is extremely dry in the summer, getting practically no precipitation of any kind during the high-sun period. Fog does not count, even if plants may exploit it. Its winters are typical of the year-round weather of a Cfb climate and its summers are typical of the year-round weather characteristic of a BWn climate. The rainfall pattern of San Francisco is shows to the extreme one aspect of Mediterranean climate. It does not get the sort of year-round rainfall that compensates for the summer drought. Pbrower2a (talk) 20:31, 31 August 2014 (UTC)
Salt Lake City has a borderline climate between Csa, Dsa and BSk depending on whether one considers
(1) the 0C vs. -3C divide between C and D climates, and
(2) whether the Mediterranean characteristic of wettest to driest months applies to a early spring (April-July) distinction. The mean monthly maximum of rainfall is in effect after the spring equinox -- but April is still one of the coolest six months. Even this is on the margin for the 3-1 ratio of precipitation in the wettest and driest months.
The climate is not moist enough to avoid being considered semi-arid if one does not accept that an early-spring maximum for precipitation can make a climate qualify as Mediterranean or 'Continental Mediterranean'. But note well that the city has its microclimates, and nearby locations with high altitudes are chillier and rainier and might qualify as having Dfa or Dfb climates. Pbrower2a (talk) 17:42, 7 November 2011 (UTC)
I think that a climate diagram for one of the southern Oregon towns (probably either Medford or Grants Pass) should be added in the chart section on the main article. A southern Oregon diagram would be a good representation of the "temperate" variety of Mediterranean climate system. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Comrade Sephiroth (talk • contribs) 19:50, 14 January 2008 (UTC)
It is the borderline areas that create controversies. Köppen classifications have their basis in natural vegetation first and then (as a consequence) agriculture. San Francisco has among the warmest winters for its latitude and the chilliest summers for lowland at its latitude. Its winters are mild enough (milder than those of Dallas) to allow palm trees to thrive.
Medford apparently has a Csa climate, as it has two undeniably hot summer months (no surprise, as it is inland and it is at roughly the latitude of Detroit, Michigan). The wettest month is almost eight times as rainy as the driest summer month, which really is dry (if not as extremely dry as July in San Francisco). But winters are decidedly colder than those of San Francisco -- and even Dallas. With its average January low near the freezing line, Medford gets plenty of frost and an average of almost five snowy days in a year. Palm trees will not thrive in Medford.
But it is borderline -- the driest month is just under the .30-inch threshold for the summer drought-no drought line that distinguishes Csa and Cfa climates. The hottest summer month averages 74°F, just barely above the summer isotherm that delineates "hot summers" from "warm summers". It is much too moist to be considered a steppe with a winter-maximum pattern of precipitation, but it is almost dry enough to fit steppe conditions for a place with nearly-even precipitation -- BSh or BSk, depending on the criteria that one uses.
Does Medford qualify for inclusion as a representative location? Hardly. First, Medford is far from being a giant city. Sacramento, California is much bigger. Second, it is borderline in its climatic classification -- between "hot summer" Csa or Cfa and "warm summer" Csb and Cfb, between "dry summer" Csa or Csb and "even-enough" Cfa or Cfb summer, and even between "even-enough" Cfa or Cfb and "semi-arid" BSH or BSK. The borderline classification on three criteria should keep Medford from representing any climate type. If someone tried to use climate of New York City as a representative city for a climate zone, either for Cfa or Dfa, I would knock it out and replace it with some other city -- and not for being too small. Poughkeepsie, on the fringe of the New York City metro area would be Dfa, but it would be too small to be a "representative" city. Pbrower2a (talk) 18:39, 14 September 2014 (UTC)
Los Angeles is not a Csa climate, is arid, dry, Bs, is an dry mediterranean climate like Murcia, Alicante or Almeria in Spain. --84.120.5.169 (talk) 21:33, 24 April 2013 (UTC)
On some climate maps, Greater Los Angeles is on a borderline between Cs and BSHs climates. Far-western Greater Los Angeles (Santa Monica, Los Angeles International Airport) is marginally humid enough to be truly Mediterranean, and mountainous areas are cool and rainy enough (Pasadena) to be Mediterranean. The Cs/BSHs line typically intersects the coast somewhere between Pacific Palisades and Long Beach, to the south and east of which any Cs climates in mountains are above downtown San Diego and Tijuana.
Lowland, inland areas of greater Los Angeles (including downtown L.A., almost all of Orange County, and San Bernardino-Riverside are BSHs. The line may be controversial in Greater Los Angeles, but the scrub along Interstate 5 between San Clemente and San Diego is undeniably that of a semidesert zone.
Really, the classifications poorly fit areas in borderline areas -- just think of the controversies on whether New York City is humid mesothermal Cfa or humid microthermal Dfa -- because borderlines themselves create controversies. Greater Los Angeles, with its microclimates related to topography, is controversial. Pbrower2a (talk) 23:55, 1 September 2014 (UTC)
If anything, I would replace Los Angeles' infobox as an example of a place with a Csa climate with Sacramento, California, which truly has one complete with rainy winters and very hot, dry summers -- even if it is close to San Francisco, differing because it is inland and away from the onshore breezes that give San Francisco its chilly summers. Sacramento is the largest city in the western hemisphere with an undeniable Csa climate aside from parts of Spain, Portugal, and Morocco west of the Greenwich Meridian. If one is to use an info box for Greater Los Angeles, then be sure to identify it as such a place as LA International Airport, Santa Monica, Pacific Palisades, or even Malibu.Pbrower2a (talk) 05:37, 19 September 2014 (UTC)
Oregon's Southwest Interior
I would definitely argue that southwest Oregon, beginning right around Roseburg, meets all the criteria required to qualify as a "true" Mediterranean climate. Even the vegetation seems to reflect this fact. North of Roseburg the rainfall pattern seems Mediterranean, but the wet season is too long and intense, and the warm season too brief and mild, to put summer stress on the Oceanic ecosystem. A few spots in the eastern Columbia Gorge between Hood River and The Dalles also seem to experience a quasi-Mediterranean ecosystem even though the winters are quite a bit colder.
Remember, if we limit Mediterranean climates to the places that have truly balmy winters (i.e. mild enough for date palms and olives and all that) then it would also rule out many of California's higher-elevation chaparral regions. And it is possible to grow the hardier varieties of olive in Oregon's Rogue Valley, and even get them to fruit! — Preceding unsigned comment added by Comrade Sephiroth (talk • contribs) 03:39, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
I have read in the Lake County, OR pages that the northern edge of the Mohave transitions into an technically Mediterranean climate. Prolonged winters, just above freezing, and semi arid conditions make this land nominally fit the bill. You will notice a notation of this designation on the Mediterranean Climate map. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.58.33.38 (talk) 00:58, 5 April 2016 (UTC)
I have been looking over the climate pages related to the Köppen climate classification page and I saw that recently, the page states that it is a particular type of subtropical climate. I think this is incorrect since not all Csa/Csb climates are subtropical. Areas such as the Pacific Northwest, Vancouver Island, Patagonia (e.g cities that lie in the narrow transition between the wet Andes to the west and the dry steppes to the east Bariloche, Esquel), and central Asia do meet the criteria of having dry summers but have cooler winters than the typical Mediterranean climate in Europe. As well, in the article by Peel et al, C climates are called temperate, not subtropical. Ssbbplayer (talk) 13:16, 27 April 2016 (UTC)
Köppen climate classification is obsolete and inaccurate
I don't realize why this page is based on that absurd and unscientific classification
eg: it's simply ridiculous that someone could be taken seriously when includes inner Pakistan and even parts of Afghanistan, Tajikistan and Ethiopia in "mediterranean climate" LOL — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.12.217.244 (talk) 00:56, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
@78.12.217.244: What do you find wrong with that? I think the Koppen system upsets a lot of people, especially with Mediterranean climates, because Mediterranean climates appear outside of areas around the Mediterranean sea. But turns out, those climates pop up elsewhere. There are alternative systems, like Trewartha, that you might want to check out. Redtitan (talk) 20:40, 21 September 2016 (UTC)
Trewartha isn't much better
I just made a map of Trewartha climate types for the lower 48 US states, to see how the climate types would shift compared to Koeppen. I hadn't seen a detailed Trewartha map of the U.S. yet, so I used high-quality PRISM data to calculate one (note: this is going entirely off calculations with climate normals data, no subjective input from me!). I'm not impressed at how it handled Mediterranean climates along the US West Coast.
The complaint with Koeppen is that it includes far too much in the Mediterranean zone. However, Trewartha nearly removes it altogether. Areas that are squarely Mediterranean under Koeppen either end up as steppe (BS), desert (BW), or humid subtropical (Cf). If it weren't for Trewartha's requirement that Mediterranean zones have <890 mm annual precipitation, all the humid subtropical would've been Mediterranean instead and I think things would've turned out a bit less ridiculous.
See if you can find the tiny sliver of yellow pixels in California that constitute the Mediterranean climate zone:
In the text of this article, there's a noncited sentence states that because Naples annual precipitation exceeds Trewartha's threshold, it's actually classifiable as humid subtropical 'Cf' and not mediterranean 'Cs'. Does anybody have any sources for that?
I tracked down a copy of Trewartha and Horn's 1980 book, Introduction to Climate, in my university's library and I didn't find anything discussing what to do if an area does exceed the annual precipitation threshold that the Trewartha classification scheme requires for Mediterranean climates. While you might suspect it'd just go to the only other category of C climate, 'Cf' - humid subtropical, there's an explicit requirement for 'Cf' climates to not have a dry-season, which is violated by places like Naples, and many locations on the US west coast, like Eureka, California, Ukiah, California, and Brookings, Oregon, all of which have high annual precipitation but a significant dry period in the summer.
I also did find something very interesting in the Trewartha and Horn book. It actually gives Naples as an example as a 'Cs' climate, and shows its annual precipitation lying just below their threshold. The current annual precipitation shown on the Naples wiki page is now just above this threshold, so it seems that the annual precipitation has inched slightly upward over the years.
Anyway, does anybody have any academic sources saying that you can ignore the dry-season requirement for 'Cf' climates in Trewartha's scheme if your dry-season location happens to be a bit too rainy? As you can see in my map in the previous section of the talk page, I followed what the text here said, assuming it'd be backed up in Trewartha and Horn, but it ultimately wasn't. This looks to me like a big hole in their climate classification scheme. Redtitan (talk) 20:54, 25 October 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Mediterranean climate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
I have just modified 2 external links on Mediterranean climate. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).
If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
In this edit an additional map was added to the article. Truth be told, it doesn't show a substantial difference from the main map. I removed it because the caption did not state what the difference amounted to, and comparing the two very similar maps was for me an exercise in time wasting I can't afford. The color shading on the map was more easily viewed, however, and I now propose that the original map be modified in the Image lab so that yellow becomes an apricot shade.--Quisqualis (talk) 18:21, 21 December 2018 (UTC)
Regarding whether to add the city of Victoria in mediterranean climate page
Can I add the city of Victoria, Canada in the wiki page of Mediterranean climate along with its climate chart in the region of "the americas"? Because, as per "koppen climate classification", the city of Victoria comes under the warm mediterranean climate/region but when I added it to the page, some Wikipedia editor reverted my edits and told that it was vandalism. Can anyone reply to this?? John singh (talk) 20:26, 20 February 2019 (UTC) John singh (talk) 20:52, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
It's okay to add the region because it indeed falls under the category, but in regards to the chart we will not need it. We're trying to limit the charts here to one per continent for each Mediterranean category. Otherwise, we'll have a gallery of charts.G. Capo (talk) 17:42, 21 February 2019 (UTC)
that map showing central Asia, Kenya, Ethiopia, Californian deserts, Iran, Oregon, Washington, Kurdistan, Colombia and Andes as areas with a mediterranean climate is absolutely ridiculous...an absurdity by Wladimir Köppen that as nothing to spare with the reality and a modern concept of climatology — Preceding unsigned comment added by 78.12.208.121 (talk) 17:20, 7 December 2019 (UTC)
Removed Colombian cities
I took out the list of Colombian cities as only Bogota could be considered Mediterranean if the definitions are applied extremely loosely ie using the less common 40mm driest month and not applying a 900mm total annual rainfall cutoff. In addition, as it's in an equatorial location the distinction between high sun or low sun rainy seasons is practically meaningless. So it's an extremely bad example of a Mediterranean climate at best. Tunja doesn't fit by any definition, as its driest months are in the low sun part of the year. Manizales does have a slightly drier season in its high sun half of the year, but its driest month has 74mm of rainfall, when the most common definition is a maximum of 30mm, while "some" use 40mm. Booshank (talk) 19:45, 14 April 2020 (UTC)
Mediterranean Basin
This is a tricky problem (and maybe controversial), in the first few lines there's a comparison of cities that belong to the mediterranean basin with others that don't belong in there, the problem is, cities that are part of the Mediterranean Basin are not the same as cities to which the closest body of water is the Mediterranean. Most of Continental Portugal, Western Morocco, Madeira, Canary islands and, to some extent, The Azores or even Cape Verde, are part of the Mediterranean Basin despite being Atlantic regions [11][12]. I do get what that sentence is trying to say but mediterranean basin is not the right word. Average Portuguese Joe (talk) 15:26, 4 October 2020 (UTC)
I've seen the claim that certain cities can not be described as fully Mediterranean if "only one month is below 30/40mm". I do not see any justification for this in the Köppen classification (although one could make one without it, as far as I know, Wikipedia's norm is Köppen, and sometimes Trewartha; not editors' opinions. If nobody objects, I will start changing these.
I think it is worth mentioning that the Walla Walla region of South Eastern Washington State falls in the hot summer Mediterranean climate and represents the most northern location in North America with this classification. 71.232.144.90 (talk) 01:34, 11 December 2022 (UTC)
![[1]](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:World_Koppen_Map.png){kind=link}
