Never allowing the forest to burn, which is a part of its natural cycle, is a form a drastic climate change for the forest.

Proper management of the forest means selecting a time to do these burns. If we don't select a time, mother nature will select one for us.

Yes, global temperature rise is real, and could potentially have had some effect on the fire. Completely disrupting the natural cycle of the forest is a much bigger deal.

I was curious to learn why we "never allow the forest to burn", given that Cal Fire for example has a whole department of Prescribed Fire. Sounds like the problem is lawyers and property owners:

> One of the primary obstacles to increasing the pace and scale of beneficial fire use in California is the difficulty for practitioners to obtain adequate liability coverage, although the rates and losses from escapes are very low.

https://www.fire.ca.gov/what-we-do/natural-resource-manageme...

> Sounds like the problem is lawyers and property owners:

Some of them might change their mind now that they’re owners of some acres of charcoal.

You cannot not choose a time - it’ll get chosen for you. Schedule should be known, cost included in taxes, risks known when property was acquired, liabilities limited in state or federal regulation. Weather doesn’t care about lawyers.

These fires are mostly burning chaparral, not forest. Better forest management is a good idea in general but not relevant to this article.