back
61 comments
The only good news is it will envelop D.C. today. Fitting to force them to smell their passive dismissal of the global catastrophe of climate change.
In addition to climate change effects, do you think that preventing wildfires for decades contributes at all? My understanding is that managed burns can be useful at preventing the worst fire fires.

The fact that some trees only germinate in the presence of wildfires points to wildfires being a very natural and pre-human thing. And recent wildfire management practices are likely a strong factor in recent wildfires.

The answer is: It's complicated

https://www.wilderness.org/articles/article/5-big-myths-abou...

Ecologically, wildfires are necessary for some biomes. However, not all of them. Many are needlessly destructive due to climate change and over logging of forests.

managed burns have their place in ecosystems where they're common.

most of these fires in Canada are because it needs to be -40C for about 2 weeks to kill off the pine beetle . if the beetle doesn't die then it, as the name suggests, infests pine trees and kills them.

after a couple seasons you have massive, absolutely immense swaths of dead pine trees, full of flammable pine tar and sap. eventually they burn, and the warm temps + beetles mean they don't come back. ecological change, biome collapse.

Mountain pine beetles are more of a BC issue. They don't really exist in Ontario. There are native beetles that target eastern white and red pine, but not with such massive pine die offs.
I don't think that's as relevant for these huge regions of remote forest in Canada as it is for the lower 48 of the USA where you have a lot of population density and ranching and farming in the dry areas that historically burned on a regular basis. Maybe someone in rural Ontario knows the full story.
Yeah, the boreal forests super rural/unpopulated bc they're mostly up north and on the shield where it's hard to build. That's said, there is quite a bit of logging lands where the age, arrangement and species makeup think we have fires more often than they're supposed to happen.

That's something to note : Jack pine which is fire adapted doesn't mature for a pretty long time. The boreal forest is meant to have massive powerful forest fires that clear stands completely but they're supposed to happen on a timeline of like 80+ years.

I'm not as plugged in as I used to be, but I recall some folks worried about more birch taking up space up north bc of how often burns were happening and birch loves to form massive stands when the floor clears.

Thank you for sharing!
Is it the case that Canada has been implemented substantial forest fire prevention practices?

I’m not an expert in forestry. It it doesn’t seem feasible that Canada was every really doing any large scale forest fire prevention simply due to the scale of the country and forests within it.

Let us each examine and repair our own, personal bond with Nature.
700 miles away and we have the worse air quality in US. something something about everyone thinks they are safe on climate change until it shows up on your doorstep.
this is stage 1 of the ecological collapse.

it's gonna get a lot worse, and sooner than people think.

How do you know its not stage 0.5 or stage 3? Genuinely want to understand if this is climate change driven or just apart of the cycle of boreal forest fires that have raged in northern Ontario for centuries.
Its definitely not part of forest fires that have raged for centuries.

In the past thousand years, we have never seen a single season where 4% of Canada's entire forest area burned down. The 2023 season torched over 15 million hectares, completely shattering the natural baseline. It's entirely unprecedented.

The line about this being normal sounds like the talking points climate skeptic grifters like Bjorn Lomborg use to breed doubt. Claiming global fires of this scale are normal is a totally dishonest stat. He even claims they are decreasing, but that decline is just because African grasslands are disappearing due to agriculture and urbanization.

When you normalize the data and isolate forests, fire-related tree cover loss in boreal forests has been accelerating by an average of 160,100 hectares per year over the last two decades. Globally, forest fires burn twice as much tree cover today as they did 20 years ago.

I'm just mentioning this in case you are only hearing the louder, skeptic side on social media.

I'm no tree hugger. I've started data centers in the telco and crypto space and have provided seed financing for natural resource mining projects, and I will continue to do so knowing that it's a positive for society. But I don't believe in being dishonest about where the data says the planet is headed.

Anyone who grew up in Toronto, Vancouver, Montreal, or New York in the 70s, 80s, and 90s knows smelling smoke and seeing red skies in the summer was not common, unless you were out at camp deep in the woods. It just didn't happen. For kids growing up in the 2020s, it's just a normal part of summer in the city.

> In the past thousand years, we have never seen a single season where 4% of Canada's entire forest area burned down

You cannot possibly know this, you do not have accurate records of forrest fires that occurred 800+ years before Canada was even founded. Wildfires abide by power law distributions [1][2] meaning that enormous outliers like the one in 2023 (and maybe even this year) are not unexpected with a long fat tail distribution. Wildfires in Canada have been trending down in terms of number of fires, but the fires are burning more area [3].

> When you normalize the data and isolate forests

Here's the past two decades of forrest fires globally [4], very hard to spot a significant trend. I'm not arguing that there isn't a problem here and that climate change isn't playing at least some role in it, but to attribute this entirely to climate change is misguided and not supported by literature.

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Power_law [2] https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.0500880102 [3] https://cwfis.cfs.nrcan.gc.ca/en/fire-history [4] https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/area-burned-wildfires-by-...

> do not have accurate records of forest fires that occurred 800+ years before

In fact we have incomplete, but detailed, records since 7000 years ago. The remains of 2000 Yo trunks can be found on swamps and peat bogs. Ancient wildfires left marks on the grow rings, that had been read for scientists since generations.

Dendrochronology and dendroclimatology, two entire science fields, had been created around this.

Right - and that data does not suggest anything close to what OP was saying.

[1] https://cdnsciencepub.com/doi/10.1139/cjfr-2024-0216 [2] https://esajournals.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ecs2...

They don’t. If people actually believed this stuff they’d be learning how to hunt, get good with long guns, filter their own water etc. Revealed preferences always smash headlong into one’s imagination.
Underneath your sneering is a failure to understand how humans tend to act.
I don’t follow. If I believed the global climate was going to collapse imminently (it’s not) I would have a very specific to do list and would be spending every hour of my free time preparing for this event. Is your point that people performatively engage in catastrophizing? In which case, I agree.
My point is that individuals behave wildly differently to the same stimuli, and therefore your belief that "revealed preferences" put the lie to stated beliefs is specious. Individual humans can believe that a broad ecological collapse is coming and still live their day to day lives in ignorance of this belief. Self-assess honestly and you'll find examples in your own life.
Well the smoke issue is going to get better, because the trees burn down once, and may not be able to grow again in the new environment.
Canadian here. Sky looked like Breaking Bad in real life.

Also, before this week, I'd never seen the weather app show a yellow map before for air quality.

Eastern Canada, perhaps? Because B.C. wildfires have made Washington maps go to "very unhealthy" (AQI 201-300), so I'm sure B.C. was above that.

(I'm not sure what "yellow" means where you're at. It's "healthy" according to https://www.airnow.gov/aqi/aqi-basics/).

In BC when they were at their worst the sky was dark yellow and the sun was a very dark blood red. It was like something I’d never seen before. Think the light level in Seattle during an extremely overcast day with a low ceiling, but everything you look at has been coloured yellow by the sunlight passing through the smoke. It looks a lot like photos from the various Mars missions.
And three years ago it was Washington and Oregon fires that were making the air unbreathable in Vancouver
That kind of international cooperation between the US and other countries is something we just don’t see anymore.
Also competition at the same time.

Canada normally surpasses the per-capita carbon emissions of the US. Now, they’re setting records ablaze and further cementing their lead.

I have a stupid question about seasonal wildfires. I was under the impression that a lot of wildfires occurred because too much brush had built up and natural burns had been foolishly prevented by firefighters. However in the past 10 years, it seems that there are many, yearly, huge wildfires in the same areas.

Why doesn't the brush get burned down? ie, why is there not a Canadian wildfire every 5-10 years? Why yearly? Is it different locations? Does dry bush just accumulate that quickly? I'm aware that global warming is a factor, but if there's less to burn I'd think that warmer temperatures eventually hit a wall.

> I was under the impression that a lot of wildfires occurred because too much brush had built up

1) People promoting the cattle invading natural areas as a solution, often omit that this means the slow death of the forest.

When the cattle is allowed to enter in a forest, from this point on, no tree sapling will survive. The ecological regeneration is permanently damaged and the forest recedes and turns into an open area with a few isolated trees. With the climate change accelerating, and each new tree counting, this is bad news for us.

2) They also ignore that wild herbivores and insects also eat (a lot of) dry plants.

Biologists have discovered than, under some circumstances, the role of ants in that sense can be more relevant than the role of deer.

3) They forget also that brush is removed by fungus all the time, turning woody stuff into a spongy matter that accumulates water.

A healthy forest can sustain more Kg of soil roundworms than Kg of deer. Most people ignore this and follow only the loudest voices

TV programs invariably, each single time, will show somebody bitterly claiming that "the evil ecologists don't allow locals to remove dead wood". This programs are basically justifying the arsonists. They feed on drama, and never, ever, no way, will interview anybody calmly explaining that there is a good reason for that: After a while, dead wood means fertile soil (= CO2 storage) and water storage. This protects us from both wildfires and climate change.

Both problems should have priority over the desire of farmers to increase its patrimony in 50 sheep plus, by invading natural areas and stealing its plants.

About the fires starting to burn yearly, take in mind that the use of the soil has changed. This is not a forest anymore. Farmers are known to use fire routinely to "regenerate" pastures. When they earn rights to manage new place as they please, the frequency of wildfires will typically increase, even if they are less serious. Is a vicious circle.

What do you mean by same area?

Canada has millions of sq km of forest. Lytton is 700km west of Jasper, which is 2000km west of Thunder Bay.

It has been pretty bad here in Michigan. Like a heavy smelly fog all day and night. Thick enough to look directly at the sun even. Going outside and not knowing about it would make you think someone was burning a dozen brush heaps next door.
Norway also attacked today with a huge wildfire.

Same pattern as in France or Greece, with a wildfire starting at just 50 Km of Oslo, but with the smoke aiming directly to choke the capital, like in Paris, or Athens in recent years.

Meanwhile Russian is growing desperate after Ukraine has been targeting its oil tankers one by one in the last month. Germany, Finland, Swedden or Poland should be extra careful in the next weeks.

Context matters.

July 6 2026 provoked wildfire in Dorsey UK.

July 7 2026 Prime Minister Carney announced military assistance for Ukraine, including $475 million for the purchase of ammunition, nearly $400 million to build 35 Canadian-made armoured vehicles, and $50 million to provide critical technology and engineering equipment.

July 10 2026 Several wildfires in UK that week. Arsonist woman detained later. Zelensky meets Graham and US implement sanctions against Russia.

July 11 2026. Lindsey Graham dies.

July 12 2026. Large wildfire starts in Ontario. One of the biggest recorded in the area. In two days there will be 180 wildfires active in Ontario.

July 13 2026. Macron meets Zelensky. A 19 Yo arsonist starts a wildfire in Fontainebleu forest near Paris the same day (It has reignited several times since that). July 14 2026. France will allow Ukraine to produce French-made cruise missiles, precision guided bombs and air defense interceptor missiles

July 15 2026. Norway will join the Special Tribunal for the Crime of Aggression against Ukraine. Holding Russia accountable for crimes committed against Ukraine is a key priority for the Norwegian Government. Two days later: Largest Wildfire in the modern history of Norway starts near Oslo

July 16 2026. Starmer meets Zelensky. Wildfire in Scotland.

Wildfires starting or active in: California, Minnesota, Oregon, Washington, Colorado, Idaho, Nevada, Texas and Florida between July 7 and July 18.

Minneapolis is about 190nm south of the fires going on in the BWCA - with help of the Canadian fires just North of Ely. Smoke had visibility at our local (KFCM) airfield at 1 mile this morning from the smoke. IFR. I got to wonder if this is going to impact the Oshkosh airshow next week... as what we would travel up is not up for that type of visibility.
As a Canuck, let me say sorry for having so many trees and not enough firefighters, for a second year in a row... at least we have to huff this stuff in before it gets to you, right?
Many of these fires are not effectively manageable by people when they get out of control (which can happen easily since they are in very remote areas), and there are a lot of them. They are also spread out over a huge geographical area. The scale is unimaginable so it isn’t a staffing problem.
dont debase yourself. that is not something to apologize for
More hybrid war

Wildfires in Spain, France and Canada starting at the same time just days after the NATO summit. 60 arsonists detained in France this year for 11000 French wildfires.

Of the 67 new wildfires today in Canada 24 were known caused by man, 27 by natural causes and 16 undetermined. This means that even with this alert level, arsonists may be still provoking between a 36% and a 60% of the wildfires in Canada. This is wrong. It shouldn't be so easy.

Long-distance wispering to fools on social nets has become too easy and profitable.

While people keeps distracted by the "cleaning forest" myth, we can expect that it will turn worse the closer we go to the end of the Ukraine war.

Ffs, just the dumbest comments in this thread.

Jumping from “caused by man” to arson is weapons grade stupidity.

Countries use a scale of wildfire risk

If there is a clear prohibition to use fire in some location today, because strong winds and low humidity create high risk of wildfires; and somebody still ignores the prohibition and start fire in five different locations in the worse conditions of the year, knowing well that every firefighter is busy yet on one of the other 800 wildfires active, would you still classify that as "accidental"?

Sometimes things are exactly what they seem to be. One barbecue that goes rogue with green level is an accident. With red level conditions, is a crime.

There are many parts of Canada under no fire restrictions at the moment.

Accidental or even negligent does not automatically mean arson. Jumping to that conclusion is silly.

Are this areas burning?

Accidents are rare, and the fires in clusters and other common patterns are typical

One alleged arsonist detained in Galicia (Spain), with a bag full of stuff. After several wildfires stated to appear near his village in the last two weeks he was watched a morning moving into two locations that soon started to burn. Near houses of course. Why not?