Letting forests burn in a controlled way could be the only way to stop mega-wildfires from continuing

The United States is losing the battle against mega-wildfires, and the only way to reverse course might be through fire itself in the form of prescribed burning, reports Mark Betancourt for Grist. While the nation's wildfires have blazed their way into urban areas in recent seasons, most wildfires burn in the rural West.

"Over the past decade, so-called megafires — characterized not only by their size, often bigger than 100,000 acres, but by their severity, speed, and impact — have become more common. They now account for the bulk of the money spent on firefighting, with the federal government spending 10 times more on suppressing wildfires than it did 30 years ago," Betancourt reports. 

He writes: "This summer’s fire conditions have already been extreme. Nearly 73 percent of the Intermountain West is experiencing severe to exceptional drought, with temperatures breaking records across the country. Add to that last winter’s meager snowpack, which has left forests ready to burn. So far in 2026, the U.S. government has reported more than 53,000 wildfires that have burned over 8 million acres — about 3 million acres more than average over the past decade."

Betancourt reports that many fire scientists say letting smaller fires "run their course" and burn away excess fuel — like dead grasses, underbrush, and small trees — in forests across the West could help prevent future megafires from erupting. "Once the extra fuel is gone," Betancourt reports, "a semblance of balance is restored," which will allow humans to "make friends with natural, lower-severity ground fires by hardening human communities against them and letting them be."

Read more about the practice of prescribed burning, which Betancourt writes has been a part federal policy in some form or fashion since the 1990s, here.

Proposed EPA rule would not require public input before construction of new pollution-causing facilities, most of which are in rural places

A newly proposed federal Environmental Protection Agency plan would eliminate the requirement that states seek public comment before issuing new air pollution permits for AI data centers and other industrial facilities, Matthew Daly reports for The Associated Press. 

If approved, this change would mean the public would have less say in construction of new data centers, which would impact rural areas more than most since the "nation’s largest data centers are being planned in marginalized and vulnerable rural communities," according to Sarah Alexander Melotte of The Daily Yonder. Pew Research found in April 2026 that 67% of planned data centers were in rural areas, with most of those being built in the South and Midwest.

"Critics say the move could thwart local residents from learning about proposed data centers or making their voices heard before projects are approved and construction begins," Daly reports. A former deputy director of EPA’s air quality office told him that "the plan could create 'an unlevel playing field where citizens in one state are kept completely in the dark about new data centers and heavy industrial emissions in their backyards, while neighboring states maintain oversight.'"

The plan could mean that the EPA could fast-track permits without requiring facilities to inform the public about where new facilities are being located. "'Data centers and other industrial sources should not be able to get their air pollution permits in secret,'" Keri Powell, a senior attorney for the Southern Environmental Law Center, told Daly. SELC represents almost 200 "environmental, health and community groups that filed comments with the EPA opposing the plan."