The devastating wind-driven wildfires that have hit Southern California this week have prompted some experts to criticize the impact of federal and state regulations on mitigation efforts.
Several wildfires are raging in the greater Los Angeles area including the Palisades Fire, which has destroyed an estimated 1,000 structures in Pacific Palisades and Malibu as of Wednesday, and the Eaton Fire near Altadena. At least five people have died in the wildfires.
Over 70,000 residents of the area are under evacuation orders as strong Santa Ana winds gusting up to 100 miles per hour continue to push the fires.
The Golden State’s struggles with damaging wildfires in both Southern California and Northern California in recent years have prompted scrutiny of federal and state regulations that critics say make it more difficult to conduct mitigation activities, like prescribed burns or treatments to remove hazardous trees and vegetation.
CALIFORNIA WILDFIRES RAGE ACROSS LOS ANGELES COUNTY, FORCING THOUSANDS TO EVACUATE THEIR HOMES
Chuck Devore, a former member of the California State Assembly and the chief national initiatives officer at the Texas Public Policy Foundation, told FOX Business in an interview that federal and state rules have hampered wildfire mitigation efforts, resulting in larger fuel loads that drive more intense wildfires.
“The nature of the wildfire problem changes a little bit from north to south… In both cases, you have the issue of air quality management districts that are under both federal and state mandate to clean up the air. That makes it difficult to have prescribed burns with the sort of frequency that needs to happen to be able to reduce the fuel load,” Devore said.
LA TIMES OWNER BLAMES MAYOR FOR CUTTING FIRE DEPARTMENT BUDGET AHEAD OF WILDFIRES: ‘COMPETENCE MATTERS’
“In Northern California as well as much of the Pacific Northwest, you have the issue of environmental regulations that came with the concern over the spotted owl that largely destroyed the domestic timber industry,” he explained. “When the timber companies went in and harvested, they would clean up the underbrush and replant. Since that’s really stopped, what’s happened is you have fire suppression combined with rapid growth of the forest and this huge fuel buildup that has resulted in greater fires up north.”
“In Southern California, you have an issue of creating defensible space around any structure, both in residences as well as commercial structures,” Devore said. “Ideally it should be 100 feet, in many cases that is mandated and the fire departments try to enforce it. But people forget, over time you live in a place, you like the way things look, the bushes and the trees start to encroach on your property and you don’t cut it back like you should.”
CALIFORNIA WILDFIRES: WHAT TO TAKE WHEN EVACUATING
Joe Reddan, a registered professional forester in California and retired forester in the U.S. Forest Service, told FOX Business that both federal and state policies can create “roadblocks” to property owners
“The California Environmental Quality Act is a quite laborious process to get through to fruition where you can actually put treatments on the ground,” Reddan said. “On the federal side of things, there is the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and the requirements that go with that including the federal Endangered Species Act, the Archaeological Resources Protection and myriad other federal laws and procedural laws that you have to work your way through.”
FLASHBACK: TRUMP HAS LONG HISTORY OF WARNING NEWSOM OVER ‘TERRIBLE’ WILDFIRE PREVENTION
Reddan explained that the elevated threat of fires in the wildland urban interface – a transition zone between unmanaged wildlands and human communities where there is significant vegetation and fuel for wildfires – means that property owners have to be “very, very dedicated to managing that vegetation so it’s not overgrown” and easier to manage if a fire breaks out.
“Southern California gets the Santa Ana winds, and that’s just an atmospheric phenomenon – you can’t prevent that, so what you have to do is mitigate the hell out of everything else to protect your population and your assets: your homes, your businesses from these fires… If it was a wind-driven fire with a low amount of fuel, there would still be losses of homes and so forth, but it would be a lot easier to manage than having overgrown vegetation that’s releasing a lot of energy,” Reddan explained.
Reddan noted that California has programs at the state and county level that aims to help homeowners and property owners in wildfire-prone areas create defensible space around their properties. However, he said that a sense among property owners that the worst won’t happen to them can lead to those programs being underutilized.
“It’s a sociological problem, in my view. It’s that people become complacent – they get religion after they have a come to Jesus meeting on these kinds of things – and after that they become very complacent.”
“It’s hard to get people to put in 30% when California’s paying you 70%. People don’t see the benefit of that. ‘Oh I won’t burn,’ and that kind of stuff… If you could solve that, you would get more people willing to invest and do the work necessary to protect their assets,” he said.
