I wish I were as optimistic as you on the fire prognosis. I think a lot of people like the forestry management angle because it's a simple, single root cause, and therefore should be easily fixed.

But the reality is much more complex. When Europeans arrived on the West coast, we fundamentally altered the environment. We clearcut the foothills, dried out vast wetlands in the valley, decimated native animal populations, dammed up the rivers, and are now depleting the groundwater. Not to mention climate change.

Is forest management a piece of the puzzle? Sure. But how do we even know what the proper approach is? The current situation is not the same as it was 300 years ago, and the same methods aren't necessarily feasible or effective. Forest thinning and well managed control burns are a good start, but I don't believe they're going to solve the wildfire issue on their own, even over a period of several decades.

> forestry mismanagement (which they’ve corrected but it takes time to make an impact)

no, this is trivializing badly. A more accurate statement is work, and there are varying opinions. The progress might be that some selection of smart, concerned and able public members now know about this topic, and discuss it at all without falling into fundemental disagreements.

At this time, one estimate shows fifteen percent of a total of thirteen million+ homes, are in extreme fire danger in 2023. But wait, that means that eighty five percent of homes are not.. and California is geographically diverse. So there are lots of real places with homes where this dire language does not apply. You cannot plaster over the reality of that with a parenthetic one-liner, however.