[runtime_blues]

That's how development always happened in much of the US. Cities expanding into forestland or grassland. The problem isn't that the homes are all of sudden luxurious, or that we somehow do less planning than in the 1880s or 1960s. It's that a mix of well-intentioned environmental policies and activism mean there's no fuel reduction happening at all. Controlled burns are one way, but logging is another.

[joe_the_user]

Yes but ultimately No and No. US cities have always expanded but the current level of "exurban" development is new - a continuation of the expansion trend no doubt but still more expansiveness, sufficient to be a barrier to fixing the problems created by fire suppression forestry.

And logging doesn't fix things the way natural fires fix things. Logging companies only want big trees and a sustainable forest has big trees that survive fires and little tree that are removed by modest fires. Clear cut areas tend to burn quite intensely because they're all small tree.