This set of files includes downscaled historical estimates of monthly total precipitation (in millimeters, no unit conversion necessary, rainwater equivalent) from 1901 - 2013 (CRU TS 3.22) at 10 min x 10 min spatial resolution with global coverage. The downscaling process utilizes CRU CL v. 2.1 climatological datasets from 1961-1990.

This set of files includes downscaled historical estimates of monthly temperature (in degrees Celsius, no unit conversion necessary) from 1901 - 2013 (CRU TS 3.22) at 10 min x 10 min spatial resolution. The downscaling process utilizes CRU CL v. 2.1 climatological datasets from 1961-1990.

This set of files includes downscaled historical estimates of monthly totals, and derived annual, seasonal, and decadal means of monthly total precipitation (in millimeters, no unit conversion necessary) from 1901 - 2006 (CRU TS 3.0) or 2009 (CRU TS 3.1) at 771 x 771 meter spatial resolution.

This set of files includes downscaled historical estimates of monthly total precipitation (in mm, no unit conversion necessary) from 1901 - 2005, at 15km x 15km spatial resolution. They include data for Alaska and Western Canada. Each set of files originates from one of five top ranked global circulation models from the CMIP5/AR5 models and RCPs, or is calculated as a 5 Model Average. These outputs are from the Historical runs of the GCMs. The downscaling process utilizes CRU CL v. 2.1 climatological datasets from 1961-1990 as the baseline for the Delta Downscaling method.

These files include historical downscaled estimates of decadal average monthly snow-day fraction ("fs", units = percent probability from 1 – 100) for each month of the decades from 1900-1909 to 2000-2009 at 771 x 771 m spatial resolution. Each file represents a decadal average monthly mean. Version 1.0 was completed in 2015 using CMIP3. Version 2.0 was completed in 2018 using CMIP5. For more information on the methodology used to create this dataset, and guidelines for appropriate usage of the dataset, please see the data user's guide here: http://data.snap.uaf.edu/data/Base/AK_771m/historical/CRU_TS/snow_day_fraction/snow_fraction_data_users_guide.pdf

These files include downscaled projections of decadal average monthly snow-day fraction ("fs", units = percent probability from 1 – 100) for each month of the decades from 2010-2019 to 2090-2099 at 771 x 771 m spatial resolution. Each file represents a decadal average monthly mean. Output is available for the CCSM4, GFDL-CM3, GISS-E2-R, IPSL-CM5A-LR, and MRI-CGCM3 models and three emissions scenarios (RCP 4.5, RCP 6.0 and RCP 8.5). These snow-day fraction estimates were produced by applying equations relating decadal average monthly temperature to snow-day fraction to downscaled decadal average monthly temperature. Separate equations were used to model the relationship between decadal monthly average temperature and the fraction of wet days with snow for seven geographic regions in the state: Arctic, Western Alaska, Interior, Cook Inlet, SW Islands, SW Interior, and the Gulf of Alaska coast, using regionally specific logistic models of the probability that precipitation falls as snow given temperature based on station data fits as in McAfee et al. 2014. These projections differ from McAfee et al. 2014 in that updated CMIP5 projected temperatures rather than CMIP3 temperatures were used for the future projections. Although the equations developed here provide a reasonable fit to the data, model evaluation demonstrated that some stations are consistently less well described by regional models than others. It is unclear why this occurs, but it is likely related to localized climate conditions. Very few weather stations with long records are located above 500m elevation in Alaska, so the equations used here were developed primarily from low-elevation weather stations. It is not clear whether the equations will be completely appropriate in the mountains. Finally, these equations summarize a long-term monthly relationship between temperature and precipitation type that is the result of short-term weather variability. In using these equations to make projections of future snow, as assume that these relationships remain stable over time, and we do not know how accurate that assumption is. These snow-day fraction estimates were produced by applying equations relating decadal average monthly temperature to snow-day fraction to downscaled projected decadal average monthly temperature. The equations were developed from daily observed climate data in the Global Historical Climatology Network. These data were acquired from the National Climatic Data Center in early 2012. Equations were developed for the seven climate regions described in Perica et al. (2012). Geospatial data describing those regions was provided by Sveta Stuefer. Perica, S., D. Kane, S. Dietz, K. Maitaria, D. Martin, S. Pavlovic, I. Roy, S. Stuefer, A. Tidwell, C. Trypaluk, D. Unruh, M. Yekta, E. Betts, G. Bonnin, S. Heim, L. Hiner, E. Lilly, J. Narayanan, F.Yan, T. Zhao. 2012. NOAA Atlas 14. Precipitation-Frequency Atlas of the United States.

Mean temperature and precipitation values extracted at community locations across Alaska and Canada from downscaled raster datasets containing historical and projected estimates for these variables.

This set of files includes annual model outputs from ALFRESCO, a landscape scale fire and vegetation dynamics model. These specific outputs are from the Integrated Ecosystem Model (IEM) project, and are from the linear coupled version using AR4/CMIP3 climate inputs (IEM Generation 1-AR4) and AR5/CMIP5 climate inputs (IEM Generation 1-AR5). These outputs include data from model rep 171(IEM Generation 1-AR4) and rep 26 (IEM Generation 1-AR5), referred to as the “best rep” out of 200 replicates. The best rep was chosen through comparing ALFRESCO’s historical fire outputs to observed historical fire patterns. Single rep analysis is not recommended as a best practice, but can be used to visualize possible changes. Climate models and emission scenarios: IEM Generation 1-AR4/CMIP3 CCCMA-CGCMS-3.1 MPI-ECHAM5 under the SRES A1B scenario IEM Generation 1-AR5/CMIP5 MRI-CGCM3 NCAR-CCSM4 under RCP 8.5 scenario Variables include: Veg: The dominant vegetation for this cell. Current values are: 0 = Not Modeled 1 = Black Spruce 2 = White Spruce 3 = Deciduous Forest 4 = Shrub Tundra 5 = Graminoid Tundra 6 = Wetland Tundra 7 = Barren / Lichen / Moss 8 = Temperate Rainforest Age: This the age of the vegetation in each cell. An Age value of 0 means it transitioned in the previous year. Basal Area: The accumulation of basal area of white spruce in tundra cell, and is influenced by seed dispersal, growth of biomass, climate data, and other factors. units = m^2 / ha Burn Severity: This is a categorical burn severity level of the previous burn in the current cell, influenced by fire size and slope. For example, a burn severity value in a file with year 1971 in the file name means that the severity level given to that file occurred in the fire that occurred in year 1970. 0=No Burn 1=Low 2=Moderate 3=High w Low Surface Severity 4=High w/ High Surface Severity Fire Scar: These are the unique fire scars. Each cell has three values. Band 1 - Year of burn Band 2 - Unique ID for the simulated fire for that simulation year Band 3 - Whether or not the cell was an ignition location for a fire. There will only be 1 ignition cell per fire per year. 0 = not ignition 1 = ignition point For background on ALFRESCO, please refer to: Is Alaska's Boreal Forest Now Crossing a Major Ecological Threshold? Daniel H. Mann, T. Scott Rupp, Mark A. Olson, and Paul A. Duffy Arctic, Antarctic, and Alpine Research 2012 44 (3), 319-331 http://www.bioone.org/doi/abs/10.1657/1938-4246-44.3.319

This set of files includes downscaled projections of decadal means of annual day of freeze or thaw (ordinal day of the year), and length of growing season (numbers of days, 0-365) for each decade from 2010 - 2100 at 2km x 2km meter spatial resolution. Each file represents a decadal mean of an annual mean calculated from mean monthly data. ---- The spatial extent includes Alaska, the Yukon Territory, British Columbia, Alberta, Saskatchewan, and Manitoba. Each set of files originates from one of five top ranked global circulation models from the CMIP5/AR5 models and RPCs, or is calculated as a 5 Model Average. Day of Freeze, Day of Thaw, Length of Growing Season calculations: Estimated ordinal days of freeze and thaw are calculated by assuming a linear change in temperature between consecutive months. Mean monthly temperatures are used to represent daily temperature on the 15th day of each month. When consecutive monthly midpoints have opposite sign temperatures, the day of transition (freeze or thaw) is the day between them on which temperature crosses zero degrees C. The length of growing season refers to the number of days between the days of thaw and freeze. This amounts to connecting temperature values (y-axis) for each month (x-axis) by line segments and solving for the x-intercepts. Calculating a day of freeze or thaw is simple. However, transitions may occur several times in a year, or not at all. The choice of transition points to use as the thaw and freeze dates which best represent realistic bounds on a growing season is more complex. Rather than iteratively looping over months one at a time, searching from January forward to determine thaw day and from December backward to determine freeze day, stopping as soon as a sign change between two months is identified, the algorithm looks at a snapshot of the signs of all twelve mean monthly temperatures at once, which enables identification of multiple discrete periods of positive and negative temperatures. As a result more realistic days of freeze and thaw and length of growing season can be calculated when there are idiosyncrasies in the data. Please note that these maps represent climatic estimates only. While we have based our work on scientifically accepted data and methods, uncertainty is always present . Uncertainty in model outputs tends to increase for more distant climatic estimates from present day for both historical summaries and future projections.

This dataset consists of sea ice indicators for the Arctic based on daily sea ice concentrations derived from satellite passive microwave measurements. The four indicators available are day of break-up start, day of break-up end, day of freeze-up start, and day of freeze-up end. These “day of year” values indicate the ordinal day of the ice-year on which the event occurred. The ice-year is defined as September 1 through August of the following year. Locally defined indicators can serve as key links between pan-Arctic or global indicators such as sea-ice extent or volume and local uses of sea ice, with the potential to inform community-scale adaptation and response.