[fliglr]

Zoom out:

>But in gauging the longer-term trend of what’s really happening with the fires, it’s necessary to go back much further. Data derived from written records from Cal Fire and the U.S. Forest Service dating back to 1919 show that wildfires, far from increasing, have actually declined over the last 100 years. And in fact the website of the National Interagency Fire Center previously noted that fires were at their very worst a century ago. (See data, research, and methodology for this article.)

>The data on the overall, century-long trend suggest that most of the 20th century represented an unusually low amount of fire, and what we’re seeing now is a return to the “normal” levels of fire of the early 1900s.

https://future.com/why-california-burns-the-facts-behind-the...

[Amezarak]

Thanks for that link. The data also shows that, over a longer (millennia) timescale, California is currently in a wet period.

Context is very important. Climate change is a critical issue, but solving it doesn't help California stop burning.

[bcrosby95]

California leaving a wet period will make it burn less.

The problem isn't a lack of water. It's that we get a ton of water for a year or two. A bunch of stuff grows. Then we get no water for many years. All that stuff that grew in the wet years dries out. Eventually it burns.

If we just enter a dry period, there is only 1 step: no water, nothing grows. No more fires.

[Amezarak]

Yes, once it's fully into the dry period. The transition period involves a lot of fire.