Active forest management

Regarding “Invest in prevention” (Editorial, Oct. 19): The Chronicle’s editorial board is correct that fire prevention has been neglected, but inexplicably it advocates for the broken system as the solution.

In addition to the recent fires that have captured the nation’s attention, my community has felt this pain before, too. In 2016, the Erskine Fire ripped through Lake Isabella and Kernville. Years before that, the Piute Fire was so big it covered Bakersfield in ash.

Active forest management is scientifically proven to be effective — the Forest Service estimates that 90 percent of fuels reduction projects reduce wildfire intensity. For the past decade, Congress has appropriated more money for these programs than the executive branch has requested. Nevertheless, regulations, bureaucratic inefficiency and obstructive litigation have repeatedly precluded restoration and prevention needed to lower the threat to our communities.

Last year the House passed the bipartisan Resilient Federal Forests Act, which would fix the borrowing problem and include other important management reforms. That bill died in the Senate.

Under the status quo, the Forest Service is only able to treat 1 percent of high-risk, overgrown areas. Meanwhile, our forests have become tinder boxes.

Few disagree that we must fund catastrophic wildfires like the emergency disasters they are. However, until we accept that forest management equals fire prevention, we will continue spinning our wheels.

Congressman Kevin McCarthy, Bakersfield