Misconceptions about Wildfires Are Fueling the Problem
The 2020 wildfire season was the worst in California’s recorded history, with more than four million acres burned and almost 10,500 structures destroyed across the state. The fires were heavily covered by the news media, and some reportssuggested California had suffered apocalyptic devastation and permanent loss. But the more complicated reality of fire’s long-term impact on forests is often poorly reported and misunderstood.
In this video, we talk to experts who say many accounts of California’s blazes sensationalize the extent of forest devastation while paying less attention to fire’s crucial role in nature.
Chad Hanson is a fire ecologist and director of the John Muir Project, an environmental group that advocates for drastic changes in state and national fire policy. He says fire is a natural and unstoppable reality in California. Hanson believes that in some cases, the state’s forests would be healthier and more resilient if certain fires were allowed to burn.
Another expert also notes that to understand 2020 in context, we need to take a very long view of fires in the forest: Valerie Trouet, a researcher who studies tree rings at the University of Arizona, has observed evidence of wildfires in giant sequoias in California dating back almost 3,000 years. She says that although today’s fires sometimes burn more intensely, they used to burn longer and over much larger areas.
Join Our Community of Science Lovers!
Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism
Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.
When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.
Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber