If you have a home in the wildland urban interface and you have not taken the responsibility to make your home Firewise, what are you waiting for? Create a firebreak on your property. And if you are physically unable there are government agencies who will help you. Ask your local fire department first, then go elsewhere from there like a state fire protection association in your area or the national forest's ranger district office. I'll never understand nor accept the prevailing hypocrisy from the pull yerself up from yer bootstraps crowd that somehow, someway the responsibility of the homeowner should be mitigated and reassigned to any government entity (again there are caveats and if you are physically unable to Firewise your property I encourage you to seek help from your local firefighters, they are some of the best people on the planet no matter where you may be. They truly love helping people and they especially love minimizing the risk of fire). You must Firewise your own property, instead of demanding the government not go through with the NEPA process and allow a nonscientific approach to fire protection that is environmentally unsound to occur and simply thin the forest around your home to protect you from the next conflagration. There are ways to protect your home, it begins with where you locate your home, you then can choose less flammable materials to build your home and you need to have a firebreak (essentially a minimalization of available fuels leading to your home). In the absence of these actions, you must accept the responsibility that someday your home may be seriously threatened by a wildfire. And it is not all the sudden the fault of the U.S. Forest Service or the Bureau of Land Management that your home is now in peril. Nor is it the fault of any environmental group that sued or demanded those agencies follow the law on any timber sale or any other land management decision they made. I understand it is a terrible thing to lose a home to fire and I do not wish that upon anyone. I also recognize there are going to be monster fires that can occur when conditions are right where you have little ability to secure a positive outcome for your home. The reasons for these types of fire are numerous and varied depending upon the situation. My point here is you must take responsibility and act to protect your home beforehand. You must not place blame in the wrong places if something should go terribly wrong. We are dealing with fire, which is an elemental force without reason or prejudice, it just is. And we all must realize that no matter where we are we are not safe from some form of natural disaster or another and therefore we must prepare for the most likely disasters and do what we can to minimize our risk. With fire our best options are to pick a good spot to build, use flame resistant materials and build a fuel break on our own property. If you consider yourself a political leader stop pointing fingers in the wrong directions and actually help the situation rather than fan the flames of rhetoric that does not serve the people affected. If you have lost your home, I am truly sorry for your loss.
Now onto this other silly notion that environmental groups are enriching themselves and also creating the problem when they file all these lawsuits. Number one, environmental groups typically win their lawsuits so your misplaced blame and anger should be refocused on the illegal actions of the other party or parties in the suit, also known as the defendants in any lawsuit brought by environmental groups. These defendants obviously broke the law because they lost the lawsuit. The environmental group then wins back the legal fees it paid to successfully sue whatever entity was breaking the law.
Maybe I'm just old-fashioned and out-of-touch, but laws are not meant to be broken. We wouldn't have taken the time to make them if the breaking of them wasn't something we wanted to stop. So, I don't know about you, but I don't want to live in a lawless society. And the law breakers should be stopped.
That's what environmental groups do when they sue whoever they sue. Sometimes they do lose and they don't get a penny for those efforts as plaintiffs (non law breaking losers in a lawsuit), but when they win and they show again how our own government has failed to follow the law, it isn't only right, it is just that their legals fees be paid by the lawless, losing party. That often times happens to be some government agency and that means you and I do pick up the tab. The question I have is why aren't you demanding better from your government agencies instead of attacking environmental groups and comparing them to terrorists or whatever bogeyman the era demands?
And one more thing, STOP calling environmentalists radicals. There is nothing radical about wanting and demanding clean air and water and for the preservation and conservation of forests and watersheds and the animal life that lives within them. There is nothing radical about ensuring laws be followed. If you think that such notions are radical, perhaps you should consider the opposite situation and realize exactly what it is you stand for.
Carry on, think, don't be reactionaries, think ahead a few moves, play some chess if it helps you think more strategically. The world will be better when you do. Thank you, that is all.