We quantified the greenhouse-gas (GHG) emission and economic implications of alternative crop and wetland mosaics on a Sacramento–San Joaquin Delta island: Staten Island. Using existing GHG fluxes measurements for the Delta and biogeochemical models, we estimated GHG emissions for a range of scenarios, including the status quo, modified groundwater management, and incorporating rice and managed wetlands. For current land uses, emissions were predicted to vary greatly (48,000 to 105,000 t CO₂-e yr^{− 1}) with varying groundwater depth. GHG emissions were highest when water depth was 120 cm, the typical depth for a Delta island, and lowest if water table depth was shallowest (60 cm). In the alternate land-use scenarios, we simulated wetlands and rice cultivation in areas of highest organic-matter soils, greatest subsidence, and GHG emissions. For each scenario, we analyzed economic implications for the land-owner by determining profit changes relative to the status quo. We spatially assigned areas for rice and wetlands, and then allowed the Delta Agricultural Production (DAP) model to optimize the allocation of other crops to maximize profit. The scenario that included wetlands decreased profits 79% relative to the status quo but reduced GHG emissions by 43,000 t CO₂-e yr^{− 1} (57% reduction). When mixtures of rice and wetlands were introduced, farm profits decreased 16%, and the GHG emission reduction was 33,000 t CO₂-e yr^{− 1} (44% reduction). When rice was cultivated on 38% of the island, profit increased 12% and emissions were 22,000 t CO₂-e yr^{− 1} lower than baseline emissions (30% reduction). Conversion to a mosaic of wetlands and crops including rice could substantially reduce overall GHG emissions of cultivated lands in the Delta without greatly affecting profitability.

Change in land use in agriculturally dominated areas is often assumed to provide positive benefits for land-owners and financial agricultural returns at the expense of biodiversity and other ecosystem services. For an agriculturally dominated area in the Central Valley of California we quantify the trade-offs among ecosystem services, biodiversity, and the financial returns from agricultural lands. We do this by evaluating three different landscape management scenarios projected to 2050 compared to the current baseline: habitat restoration, urbanization, and enhanced agriculture. The restoration scenario benefited carbon storage services and increased landscape suitability for birds, and also decreased ecosystem disservices (nitrous oxide emissions, nitrogen leaching), although there was a trade-off in slightly lower financial agricultural returns. Under the urbanization scenario, carbon storage, suitability for birds, and agricultural returns were negatively affected. A scenario which enhanced agriculture, tailored to the needs of a key species of conservation concern (Swainson’s Hawk, Buteo swainsoni), presented the most potential for trade-offs. This scenario benefitted carbon storage and increased landscape suitability for the Swainson's Hawk as well as 15 other focal bird species. However, this scenario increased ecosystem disservices. These spatially explicit results, generated at a scale relevant to land management decision-makers in the Central Valley, provide valuable insight into managing for multiple benefits in the landscape and an approach for assessing future land-management decisions.