Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
It seems the other thread got deleted so I'm going to repost this here because it's pertinent to this thread.
I've come to agree with Joe: subtropical is not a climate zone, it's an environment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe90
My contention, is that subtropical Is a label more appropriate for the biome/environment of a place, rather than the climate - places with mild winters/cool summers can have a subtropical environment, as do places with mild winters/warm summers.
There are the borderline subtropicals like Louisville, KY.
When I think of subtropical climates, the ones that jump to mind are Memphis, TN or New Orleans, LA.
There are other warm climates out West that would satisfy the temperature averages but I associate subtropical climates with certain flora and with year-round ample rainfall. There also needs to be a certain amount of seasonality to them.
Seattle nearly meets your criteria. Do you think it is Subtropical?
Well...
--It has mild summers, fails to meet Trewartha's Cf and is cold during the day for 4 to 5 months of the year.
--Joe90 once said, "The more plant species a place can grow, the more subtropical that place is." So it's clearly at least closer to the subtropics than Boston and Boise, probably even New York City.
--I believe places with winters over 6C deserve to be considered subtropical regardless of their summer temps/growing season lengths. You start to be able to grow A LOT there.
--Seattle can probably grow somewhat more plant species than even Nashville and Oklahoma City, two actual subtropical places.
Decide for your self. I personally say no, although very very close (one of three Victoria, British Columbia weather stations just barely exceeds 6C).
Joe90 once said, "The more plant species a place can grow, the more subtropical that place is." So it's clearly at least closer to the subtropics than Boston and Boise, probably even New York City.
I believe places with winters over 6C deserve to be considered subtropical regardless of their summer temps/growing season lengths. You start to be able to grow A LOT there.
I don't think Valentia Observatory, with its 7.2C/45F coolest month mean, can be considered subtropical, however a point can be made about vegetation, since Ireland's southwest coast can support many subtropical plants, although not natively of course.
Are we talking about tropical climates or subtropical climates?
There doesnt need to be a record event for them. The weather going below average could be enough.
And frost is something very easy to happen in winter during the clear nights.
You have a point.
There are even non-frost-free climates in the U.S. like Houston, Austin, San Antonio, Tucson, Jacksonville and especially Tampa that are semi-tropical in nature. For that matter, San Francisco (which is frost-free) is itself more tropical than temperate. I think of subtropical climates as those below 10C/50F in winter, but above 3C/37.4F for hot-summer climates or 6C/42.7F for mild-summer. You'd be hard-pressed to find a frost-free climate like that! However, I still don't believe any fully tropical climate has a winter mean below 18C/64.4F; a semi-tropical category needs to be added for the "lower", very-warm-winter subtropical climates that can easily support citrus, some other less sensitive tropical vegetation and year-round tree growth.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.