No, Mainstream Media, Climate Change Isn’t to Blame for California’s Wildfires
The devastating wildfires in Los Angeles have once again become a rallying cry for those blaming climate change for natural disasters. Recent coverage, such as stories in Axios and by the BBC hastily and falsely connect these wildfires to a “rare confluence of climate factors,” a narrative that has become all too familiar. However, any such connection is unsupported by data. As is often the case, linking individual wildfires or even a single year’s wildfires to long-term climate change oversimplifies complex natural events, failing to address the broader context. To truly understand these fires, we must consider history, meteorology, and land management—not just the latest climate narrative.
California has a long history of wildfires, the vast majority of which occurred well before human-induced climate change became a point of discussion. Historical records and studies show that the region has always been prone to cycles of fire. For example, a study published by the U.S. Forest Service highlights the significant role of wildfires in the natural ecology of California, with fire-return intervals ranging from decades to centuries, depending on the ecosystem.
Native Americans set fires to manage vegetation and prevent catastrophic wildfires. However, these practices were abandoned after European settlement, contributing to the accumulation of fuel in forests. Today’s fires, while tragic, fit into a long history of natural and human-influenced fire activity in the region.
The cause? Santa Ana Winds, which is weather, not climate.
The current fires in Los Angeles are largely driven by the infamous Santa Ana winds, a well-documented weather phenomenon. These dry, gusty winds blow from the inland deserts toward the coast, creating the perfect conditions for rapid fire spread. The National Weather Service provides detailed explanations of the Santa Ana winds, describing how they are driven by high-pressure systems over the Great Basin. All it takes is a spark, or an arsonist. to initiate a raging wind-driven wildfire.
In this satellite video below from the Cooperative Institute for Research in the Atmosphere, note how the Santa Ana wind, coming from the Northeast, is fanning the fire, and blowing the smoke out to sea at a rapid pace.
Another critical factor in California’s wildfire problem is land management. Decades of fire suppression policies have allowed fuel – (aka dead trees, dry brush, and dense vegetation) – to accumulate, creating tinderbox conditions. A report from Cal Fire explains the role of vegetation management in reducing fire risks and outlines how fuel accumulation has made fires more intense
Meanwhile, urban expansion into wildland areas (the so-called wildland-urban interface) places more homes and infrastructure in harm’s way. Studies by the University of California, Berkeley, highlight the challenges posed by housing developments in fire-prone areas.
Historically, fires that would have naturally thinned forests and cleared underbrush were extinguished, leading to denser forests that burn more intensely. These issues receive far less attention than the simplistic claim that “climate change” is to blame.
Why does every natural disaster now seem to come with a climate change label? The media and policymakers have increasingly tied singular weather events—hurricanes, droughts, floods, and now wildfires—to global warming aka climate change. While it’s true that the climate influences weather patterns, the leap to blaming every fire or flood on climate change often skips over critical context.
The Axios article refers to “rare climate factors” but offers little in terms of specifics. Are these factors quantifiable, or are they speculative? Without rigorous data, these claims serve more as hyperbolic talking points than scientific evidence.
Blaming wildfires on climate change might make for an easy headline, but it distracts from real solutions. Improving forest management, enforcing sensible building codes, and investing in early detection and firefighting infrastructure could significantly reduce the risk and impact of wildfires. The Little Hoover Commission, an independent state oversight agency, has been vocal about the need for better forest management practices in California (source). Unblocking and stopping the removal of forest roads, for example, to allow easier access by firefighters to fires in distant wilderness areas before they become large conflagrations that reach populated areas, would be one good policy response to reduce the land, buildings, and lives lost to wildfires. Reinstituting large scale logging on overcrowded forested areas to reduce the fuel available when fires start would be another.
Policies driven by the climate change narrative often prioritize symbolic actions over practical measures. For example, California’s focus on renewable energy mandates and electric vehicles will have little or no impact on either the short- or long-term risks of wildfires. Worse, these policies can siphon resources away from critical fire prevention measures.
California’s wildfires are tragic, but they are not unprecedented. The media’s rush to attribute these fires to climate change reflects a broader trend of politicizing natural disasters, often at the expense of meaningful solutions.
It’s essential to approach the wildfire issue with a clear-eyed understanding of history, science, and policy. The fires in Los Angeles are a reminder not of climate doom, but of the importance of thoughtful land management and disaster preparedness—solutions grounded in reality, not rhetoric.
Anthony Watts is a senior fellow for environment and climate at The Heartland Institute. Watts has been in the weather business both in front of, and behind the camera as an on-air television meteorologist since 1978, and currently does daily radio forecasts. He has created weather graphics presentation systems for television, specialized weather instrumentation, as well as co-authored peer-reviewed papers on climate issues. He operates the most viewed website in the world on climate, the award-winning website wattsupwiththat.com.
#
Related:
“The ‘wildfire problem’ is essentially more a social than a natural one.” Researchers from the Universidad Carlos III de Madrid found that “climate change” is not to blame for increased forest fires in the Mediterranean basin.”…
“In the United States, wildfires are also due in part to a failure to thin forests or remove dead and diseased trees.
Pielke Jr.: “The IPCC has not detected or attributed fire occurrence or area burned to human-caused climate change
Globally, emissions from wildfires has decreased globally over recent decades, as well as in many regions
Canada wildfire trends show no increase in recent decades
Wildfires used to be much more extensive in past centuries
Wildfires are a part of the natural eco-system.”
Lomborg on Global wildfires: For more than two decades, satellites have recorded fires across the planet’s surface. The data are unequivocal: Since the early 2000s, when 3% of the world’s land caught fire, the area burned annually has trended downward. In 2022, the last year for which there are complete data, the world hit a record low of 2.2% burned area…The latest report by the United Nations’ climate panel doesn’t attribute the area burned globally by wildfires to climate change. Instead, it vaguely suggests the weather conditions that promote wildfires are becoming more common in some places. Still, the report finds that the change in these weather conditions won’t be detectable above the natural noise even by the end of the century. …
America wildfires: While the complete data aren’t in for 2023, global tracking up to July 29 by the Global Wildfire Information System shows that more land has burned in the Americas than usual. But much of the rest of the world has seen lower burning — Africa and especially Europe. Globally, the GWIS shows that burned area is slightly below the average between 2012 and 2022, a period that already saw some of the lowest rates of burned area.
Australian Wildfires: Likewise, while Australia’s wildfires in 2019-20 earned media headlines such as “Apocalypse Now” and “Australia Burns,” the satellite data show this was a selective narrative. The burning was extraordinary in two states but extraordinarily small in the rest of the country. Since the early 2000s, when 8% of Australia caught fire, the area of the country torched each year has declined. The 2019-20 fires scorched 4% of Australian land, and this year the burned area will likely be even less.
When reading headlines about fires, remember the other climate scare tactics that proved duds. Polar bears were once the poster cubs for climate action, yet are now estimated to be more populous than at any time in the past half-century. We were told climate change would produce more hurricanes, yet satellite data shows that the number of hurricanes globally since 1980 has trended slightly downward.
