Comparing the effects of different land management strategies across several land types on California's landscape carbon and associated greenhouse gas budgets

Land-based carbon sequestration and GreenHouse Gas (GHG) reduction strategies are often implemented in small patches and evaluated independently from each other, which poses several challenges to determining their potential benefits at the regional scales at which carbon/GHG targets are defined. These challenges include inconsistent methods, uncertain scalability to larger areas, and lack of constraints such as land ownership and competition among multiple strategies. To address such challenges we have developed an integrated carbon and GHG budget model of California's entire landscape, delineated by geographic region, land type, and ownership. This empirical model has annual time steps and includes net ecosystem carbon exchange, wildfire, multiple forest management practices including wood and bioenergy production, cropland and rangeland soil management, various land type restoration activities, and land cover change. While the absolute estimates vary considerably due to uncertainties in initial carbon densities and ecosystem carbon exchange rates, the estimated effects of particular management activities with respect to baseline are robust across these uncertainties. Uncertainty in land use/cover change data is also critical, as different rates of shrubland to grassland conversion can switch the system from a carbon source to a sink. The results indicate that reducing urban area expansion has substantial and consistent benefits, while the effects of direct land management practices vary and depend largely on the available management area. Increasing forest fuel reduction extent over the baseline contributes to annual GHG costs during increased management, and annual benefits after increased management ceases. Cumulatively, it could take decades to recover the cost of 14 years of increased fuel reduction. However, forest carbon losses can be completely offset within 20 years through increases in urban forest fraction and marsh restoration. Additionally, highly uncertain black carbon estimates dominate the overall GHG budget due to wildfire, forest management, and bioenergy production. Overall, this tool is well suited for exploring suites of management options and extents throughout California in order to quantify potential regional carbon sequestration and GHG emission benefits.