Context In addition to biodiversity conservation, California rangelands generate multiple ecosystem services including livestock production, drinking and irrigation water, and carbon sequestration. California rangeland ecosystems have experienced substantial conversion to residential land use and more intensive agriculture. Objectives To understand the potential impacts to rangeland ecosystem services, we developed six spatially explicit (250 m) climate/land use change scenarios for the Central Valley of California and surrounding foothills consistent with three Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change emission scenario narratives.Methods We quantified baseline and projected change in wildlife habitat, soil organic carbon (SOC), and water supply (recharge and runoff). For six case study watersheds we quantified the interactions of future development and changing climate on recharge, runoff and streamflow, and precipitation thresholds where dominant watershed hydrological processes shift through analysis of covariance. Results The scenarios show that across the region, habitat loss is expected to occur predominantly in grasslands, primarily due to future development (up to a 37 % decline by 2100), however habitat loss in priority conservation errors will likely be due to cropland and hay/pasture expansion (up to 40 % by 2100). Grasslands in the region contain approximately 100 teragrams SOC in the top 20 cm, and up to 39 % of this SOC is subject to conversion by 2100. In dryer periods recharge processes typically dominate runoff. Future development lowers the precipitation value at 123Landscape Ecol (2015) 30:729-750 DOI 10.1007 which recharge processes dominate runoff, and combined with periods of drought, reduces the opportunity for recharge, especially on deep soils. Conclusion Results support the need for climatesmart land use planning that takes recharge areas into account, which will provide opportunities for water storage in dry years. Given projections for agriculture, more modeling is needed on feedbacks between agricultural expansion on rangelands and water supply.

Significant efforts are underway to translate improved understanding of how climate change is altering ecosystems into practical actions for sustaining ecosystem functions and benefits. We explore this transition in California, where adaptation and mitigation are advancing relatively rapidly, through four case studies that span large spatial domains and encompass diverse ecological systems, institutions, ownerships, and policies. The case studies demonstrate the context specificity of societal efforts to adapt ecosystems to climate change and involve applications of diverse scientific tools (e.g., scenario analyses, downscaled climate projections, ecological and connectivity models) tailored to specific planning and management situations (alternative energy siting, wetland management, rangeland management, open space planning). They illustrate how existing institutional and policy frameworks provide numerous opportunities to advance adaptation related to ecosystems and suggest that progress is likely to be greatest when scientific knowledge is integrated into collective planning and when supportive policies and financing enable action.

No abstract

NRCS) for project strategy and careful chapter reviews; John Lowrie (CA Natural Resources Agency) for advice during project inception; Dan Macon (UC Davis / Flying Mule Farm) for useful input on rancher adaptation strategies; Andrew McElrone (UC Davis) for project oversight and guidance; Jim Oltjen (UC Davis) for project development and careful review of several chapters; Steven Ostoja (USDA California Climate Hub) for project strategy, scheduling, and resources; Mark Schwartz (UC Davis) for staffing support, project coordination, and technical advice on climate modeling; Kerri Steenwerth (USDA-ARS) and Peter Stine (USDA-FS) for helping to build the project outline and author team; Darrel Sweet (CA Cattlemen's Association) for in-person conversations and practical input on early drafts; Jim Thorne (UC Davis) for staffing support and technical input on vegetation modeling and mapping; Rich Walker (CAL FIRE) for sharing findings from the Fire Resource and Assessment Program; and Dustin Ward (USDA-ARS) for assistance finalizing the manuscript.

No abstract

No abstract

In the original publication of this paper, the sentence in abstract (under Results subheading) should read as follows:The scenarios show that across the region, habitat loss is expected to occur predominantly in grasslands, primarily due to future development (up to a 37 % decline by 2100); however, habitat loss in priority conservation areas will likely be due to cropland and hay/pasture expansion (up to 40 % by 2100).The online version of the original article can be found under