Terrestrial ecosystems are an important sink for atmospheric carbon dioxide (CO₂), sequestering ~30% of annual anthropogenic emissions and slowing the rise of atmospheric CO₂. However, the future direction and magnitude of the land sink is highly uncertain. We examined how historical and projected changes in climate, land use, and ecosystem disturbances affect the carbon balance of terrestrial ecosystems in California over the period 2001–2100. We modeled 32 unique scenarios, spanning 4 land use and 2 radiative forcing scenarios as simulated by four global climate models. Between 2001 and 2015, carbon storage in California's terrestrial ecosystems declined by −188.4 Tg C, with a mean annual flux ranging from a source of −89.8 Tg C/year to a sink of 60.1 Tg C/year. The large variability in the magnitude of the state's carbon source/sink was primarily attributable to interannual variability in weather and climate, which affected the rate of carbon uptake in vegetation and the rate of ecosystem respiration. Under nearly all future scenarios, carbon storage in terrestrial ecosystems was projected to decline, with an average loss of −9.4% (−432.3 Tg C) by the year 2100 from current stocks. However, uncertainty in the magnitude of carbon loss was high, with individual scenario projections ranging from −916.2 to 121.2 Tg C and was largely driven by differences in future climate conditions projected by climate models. Moving from a high to a low radiative forcing scenario reduced net ecosystem carbon loss by 21% and when combined with reductions in land‐use change (i.e., moving from a high to a low land‐use scenario), net carbon losses were reduced by 55% on average. However, reconciling large uncertainties associated with the effect of increasing atmospheric CO₂ is needed to better constrain models used to establish baseline conditions from which ecosystem‐based climate mitigation strategies can be evaluated.

Wildland fires have a multitude of ecological effects in forests, woodlands, and savannas across the globe. A major focus of past research has been on tree mortality from fire, as trees provide a vast range of biological services. We assembled a database of individual-tree records from prescribed fires and wildfires in the United States. The Fire and Tree Mortality (FTM) database includes records from 164,293 individual trees with records of fire injury (crown scorch, bole char, etc.), tree diameter, and either mortality or top-kill up to ten years post-fire. Data span 142 species and 62 genera, from 409 fires occurring from 1981-2016. Additional variables such as insect attack are included when available. The FTM database can be used to evaluate individual fire-caused mortality models for pre-fire planning and post-fire decision support, to develop improved models, and to explore general patterns of individual fire-induced tree death. The database can also be used to identify knowledge gaps that could be addressed in future research.

Balancing society’s competing needs of development and conservation requires careful consideration of tradeoffs. Renewable energy development and biodiversity conservation are often considered beneficial environmental goals. The direct footprint and disturbance of renewable energy, however, can displace species’ habitat and negatively impact populations and natural communities if sited without ecological consideration. Offsets have emerged as a potentially useful tool to mitigate residual impacts after trying to avoid, minimize, or restore affected sites. Yet the problem of efficiently designing a set of offset sites becomes increasingly complex where many species or many sites are involved. Spatial conservation prioritization tools are designed to handle this problem, but have seen little application to offset siting and analysis. To address this need we designed an offset siting support tool for the Desert Renewable Energy Conservation Plan (DRECP) of California, and present a case study of hypothetical impacts from solar development in the Western Mojave subsection. We compare two offset scenarios designed to mitigate a hypothetical 15,331 ha derived from proposed utility-scale solar energy development (USSED) projects. The first scenario prioritizes offsets based precisely on impacted features, while the second scenario offsets impacts to maximize biodiversity conservation gains in the region. The two methods only agree on 28% of their prioritized sites and differ in meeting species-specific offset goals. Differences between the two scenarios highlight the importance of clearly specifying choices and priorities for offset siting and mitigation in general. Similarly, the effects of background climate and land use change may lessen the durability or effectiveness of offsets if not considered. Our offset siting support tool was designed specifically for the DRECP area, but with minor code modification could work well in other offset analyses, and could provide continuing support for a potentially innovative mitigation solution to environmental impacts.