Bowers 1

Sterling Bowers

Kade Parry

English 2020

October 28, 2022

The Burning Issue of Wildfire

The issue of wildfires in the western United States has always been prevalent but has

soared to new heights in recent years. Every summer we are surrounded by a whirlwind of

information. From videos of devastated communities to reports of the millions of acres burned,

economic ruin and lives tragically lost, there is no escaping it. Wildfires are an incredibly

powerful natural disaster that can negatively impact vast amounts of people. This statement is

widely believed by the majority of Americans but not everyone can agree why. The wide variety

of people that live in wildfire prevalent zones lead to differing opinions and beliefs about what is

causing the increase of fires and what should be done in the future. The view of someone that

just lost their home to fire will likely be different to that of a firefighter or a biologist. These

differences can be seen best when comparing articles discussing the cause and future for western

wildfires. In the article “Incorporating Anthropogenic Influences into Fire Probability Models:

Effects of Human Activity and Climate Change on Fire Activity in California”, author Michael

L. Mann claims that a significant portion in the rise of wildfire severity can be contributed to

how people interact with it. Alejandra Burunda, from National Geographic claims that climate

change is the largest driving factor in the increase of wildfire frequency and severity. In the

article “Decades of mismanagement led to choked forests — now it's time to clear them out, fire

experts say”, author Alicia Victoria Lozano from MSNBC argues that mismanagement of forests

have lead to the increase of wildfires. These three articles represent the divide that defines the
 Bowers 2

debate about western wildfires. With limited resources and capabilities, it is crucial to pursue the

correct course. Each author argues why their stance of climate change, human interference, or

forest management is the biggest root cause and deserves the most attention

In the article “Incorporating Anthropogenic Influences into Fire Probability Models”,

author Michael L. Mann lays out a variety of ways that human interference is making the

wildfire problem worse than it would be if humans were not around. The author states that we

can reduce our risks by disincentivizing housing development in fire-prone areas, “In San Diego

County three of every four homes were built within such risk-prone WUI areas” (Mann).

Building in areas known to be dangerous greatly changes the potential impact a wildfire can

have. Nobody would build their house on the side of an active volcano then blame other factors

when their house burns down. Often the areas most impacted are remote and very difficult for

firefighters to safely work in. The severity of a fire is commonly visualized by the number of

homes burned. Mann argues that the choice to build in fire-prone areas increases the potential

economic impact of a fire which in turn affects the perception of wildfire severity.

Mann places the blame for wildfire origins at the feet of people not nature. “Across

California, humans are currently responsible for igniting approximately 95% of wildfires

(Mann). The starting point for nearly all wildfires is anything but wild. Wildfires must be

looked at as a social issue since most of them are manmade. The author claims that ignoring the

human impact on fires starting would paint an incomplete and inaccurate understanding.

In the article “The Science Connecting Wildfires to Climate Change” author Alejandra

Burunda makes the claim that the dramatic rise in climate change is the largest driving factor in

wildfire severity. The author clearly states that rising temperatures and less moisture is setting

the west up for optimal burn conditions (Burunda). The article does acknowledge that there are
 Bowers 3

other factors that contribute to where, when, and how intense fires are. However, climate change

is declared to be largest sole variable that impacts all other facets of wildfires.

Burunda explains what seems to be a small increase in global temperatures drastically

changes the humidity and moisture available to plants. The average global temperature has risen

by 1.8 degrees Fahrenheit in the last 100 years. As a result, dryer air is like a sponge that will

soak up moisture from the soil (Burunda). These scientific explanations are used to strengthen

the argument that what looks like a small change in temperature can have big consequences.

Wildfires don’t start out as hundred-foot-tall infernos that can burn entire forests.

Normally they start with a spark and the conditions dictate if they die out or grow to tremendous

size. Burunda focuses on this with the quote, “in a lot of places, you have a lot of ‘flashy’ fuel

on the ground,” says Balch. “This stuff that’s as thin as paper—(like) grasses “(Burunda). Most

people don’t think of grass or leaves when they hear the word wildfire, but the article explains

how important they are. Climate change is presented as the main factor that determines if these

small fuels are green and safe or dry and flammable. Burunda argues that rising temperatures are

the main variable that decides the severity of wildfires.

In the article “Decades of mismanagement led to choked forests — now it's time to clear

them out, fire experts say”, author Alicia Victoria Lozano presents the claim that

mismanagement of forests by government agencies has led to the worsening of wildfires in the

American West. The article states that billions of dollars have been spent over the last several

decades because “federal, state and local agencies have prioritized fire suppression over

prevention” (Lozano). The author implies that the government is investing all of their money into

the wrong part of the problem. Lozano argues that the emphasis on putting out fires instead of

preventing them has led to forests that overall are less healthy then a hundred years ago.
 Bowers 4

Lozano states that fire is an integral part of the ecosystem in the western United States.

Historical data is given dating back to the time of conquistadors that suggest that native people

have long used controlled burns to clean out the forest and prevent the buildup of fuels. (Lozano)

This historical style of living with wildfires is compared to the more drastic methods adopted in

the last hundred years. Using small fires to manage the forests was replaced by putting out every

fire as quickly as possible. Lozano makes the case that this change in philosophy has resulted in

forests that are long overdue to be burned.

Underbrush has been allowed to build up creating perfect conditions for wildfires to

decimate entire regions. “One researcher studying the Stanislaus National Forest in Northern

California found records from 1911 showing just 19 trees per acre in one section of the forest.

More than a century later, the researcher and his team counted 260 trees per acre (Lozano)”. An

increase in the number of trees would appear to be a positive change but Lozano doesn’t believe

it is. The higher density of trees eliminates natural firebreaks that historically would have helped

control fires. Lozano argues that mismanagement in the approach to combat wildfires has only

wasted billions of dollars and made the forests more vulnerable to future fires.

Wildfires are becoming an increasing large problem in the western United States. Most

experts seem to agree on certain opinions while having differing views on other key points. All

of the articles compared above acknowledge that rising global temperatures do have an effect on

wildfires, but they seem to disagree about how large it is. Each article was written to show why

their selected reason is the most important and relevant. None of the articles directly

contradicted the beliefs of the others but still portrayed their opinion as the most critical part of

the issue. Everyone involved has the same goal to minimize the loss of life and property while

balancing the health of the forests. This common goal helps keep a controversial topic from
 Bowers 5

becoming a hostile argument full of accusations and bitterness that counteracts the positive work

being done.

These articles are an interesting selection to study. Believing one side doesn’t mean you

have to discredit another. It is possible for each perspective to have truth to it. The controversy

arises when the order of importance is considered. Each person will have their own order of

what they believe is most important which will influence what kind of action they would like to

take place. All points have validity, but realistic expectations have to be put in place. Reducing

climate change is a fantastic goal but is part of a much larger issue that the Forest Service alone

will not be able to fix. Human interference is a major concern. Fires caused by people need to

be reduced but at the end of the day fire is inevitable. The best plan is to manage forests and fire

better. Wildfire has always been a part of the life cycle of the land, so we need to figure out how

to allow it to continue while causing the smallest impact to society.

Works Cited

Borunda, Alejandra. “The Science of How Climate Change Impacts Fires in the West.” Science,

National Geographic, 3 May 2021,

 Bowers 6

https://www.nationalgeographic.com/science/article/climate-change-increases-risk-fires-

western-us.

Lozano, Alicia V. “Decades of Mismanagement Led to Choked Forests - Now It's Time to Clear

Them out, Fire Experts Say.” NBCNews.com, NBCUniversal News Group, 18 Oct. 2020,

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/decades-mismanagement-led-choked-forests-

now-it-s-time-clear-n1243599.

Mann, Michael, et al. "Incorporating Anthropogenic Influences into Fire Probability Models:

Effects of Human Activity and Climate Change on Fire Activity in California." PLOS

ONE, vol. 11, no. 4, 2016, p. e0153589, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0153589.