California expected to lose 7% to 20% of all trees or 120 million

For Asner's mostly Canadian crew, the Golden State is a tarnished beauty.
"It's just burnt," says pilot Don Koopmans of Saskatchewan.
Asner's assessment is equally blunt.
The mountains ringing Los Angeles are "a tinderbox."
The oak forests in the Sierra foothills are "in big trouble."
Pinnacles is "not a happy place for a tree," and the forests northwest of Redding are surprisingly compromised.
To explain what 120 million trees dying across the state might mean, Asner paints a picture of California's ecological diversity and size. He then takes out his calculator.
He estimates there are 585 million to 1.6 billion trees in the state's forests and apologizes for not being more precise. An accurate census, he says, has never been conducted, but 120 million represents 7% to 20%. Under normal circumstances, forests lose between 1% and 1.5% of their trees
annually.
end quote from:
http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-dying-forests-20151020-story.html#

But, if I actually think about this for a moment if we are going to lose 1% to 1.5 % per year losing say 10% of trees is maybe about 10 years of normal loss or less. Because 1.5% in ten years is 15% of the total.

Also, there are forest die offs all over the U.S. usually in around 100 year cycles where the whole forest dies off. And then there is global warming where new seedlings have to be blown or travel in bird or animal feces to higher and higher elevations over time to grow successfully.

However, the real problem is all these things are happening at once now over time. So, this stresses the forests more. However, just like with humans in a pandemic only the strongest immune systems of humans and the same with trees in regard to strength and heartiness are going to survive. So, whether this is happening to trees or humans, in the end only the strongest are going to survive (or most pragmatic and intelligent) Usually both (if they are humans).