The inferno has been contained, said Mike Anton in the Los Angeles Times, but the fallout has barely begun. As the devastating wildfires of Southern California were brought under control this week, millions of dazed residents struggled to come to terms with the scope of the disaster. In all, 24 separate blazes from the Simi Valley to the Mexican border destroyed nearly 3,000 structures and more than half a million acres. Seven people died; thousands were left homeless, confused, and distraught. I lived through eight fires out here and I’ve never seen anything like this, Mark Jackson said as he watched his century-old home in Modjeska Canyon burn to the ground, while helpless firefighters were held back by a wall of flames and intense heat. Why can’t you do anything? he asked them.
If Californians are looking to assign blame, said Katharine Mieszkowski in Salon.com, they should start with our national policy of fire suppression. Periodic forest fires are a natural part of the ecosystem, thinning out vegetation and germinating new growth. But for a century, it’s been standard practice to stamp out all fires, no matter how small. This, some scientists say, has left southern California’s low brush full of fuel—old, dead branches and leaves—that easily ignites. The problem, of course, is that controlled burning of the fuel isn’t exactly popular in California, where the population has tripled since 1950 and 50 percent of the new housing has been built in severe fire zones. There is zero tolerance for fire in Southern California, said Richard Halsey, a biologist and firefighter, and that’s never going to change.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.
Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
