As wildfires burn across the British Columbia's southern Interior and smoke again reaches communities far from the fire line, a harder question is emerging behind the daily evacuation updates and air quality warnings: Is the province doing enough to manage its forests?
The question has taken on added political weight as criticism of Canadian wildfire smoke has surfaced south of the border and as politicians debate whether severe fire seasons are primarily a climate problem, a forest management problem or both.
According to Murray Wilson, that framing misses the point if it becomes an excuse for inaction.
Wilson, a former forester, discussed wildfire risk, smoke, forest management and the shrinking capacity of the forest sector in an interview with The Really Big Show. He said communities need to prepare for a future in which large fires and severe smoke events are no longer treated as rare exceptions.
“When are we going to do something?” Wilson asked after describing the scale of recent fire seasons. “We know what the solutions are.”
Wilson said the province has seen major burned areas in recent years and argued that wildfire emissions can overwhelm gains made through other climate measures.
His argument is not that climate change is irrelevant, but rather that climate conditions must be considered alongside the amount of combustible material in forests, access for crews, local planning and the capacity to carry out preventive work.
That distinction matters as wildfire policy becomes part of the broader political debate around climate change. Governments can point to hotter and drier conditions, Wilson said, but that does not answer the practical question of what should be done in forests before a fire reaches an extreme stage.
Once a fire is burning under severe conditions, he explained, firefighters may have few safe or effective options for direct attack. Prevention, fuel reduction, thinning and community protection therefore have to be treated as core work, not as an afterthought following an emergency.
Smoke is a health issue, not only a visibility issue
Wilson also stressed that wildfire smoke should be understood as a public health issue. Smoke can reach communities hundreds or thousands of kilometres from active fires, affecting people who are not under evacuation order and may not think of themselves as living in a fire zone.
He has presented research on the issue to medical audiences and argued that public policy needs to recognize the cumulative impacts of repeated smoke events.
The cross border nature of smoke has added urgency to the debate. Smoke does not stop at a provincial or national boundary, and criticism from the United States does not change the fact that the conditions producing it are rooted in a mix of weather, climate, forest conditions and land management decisions.
That does not mean Canada is solely responsible for every smoky day in the United States, but it does mean Canadian governments have to be able to show what they are doing to reduce preventable risk at home.
The mill closure question
Wilson noted that the loss of mill capacity is central to that conversation.
He said 23 mills in British Columbia have closed since 2023 and the closures affect more than direct jobs. They can also reduce the local workforce, equipment, road access, contractors and processing capacity that forest communities have traditionally relied on.
According to Wilson, if fewer people are working in the woods and fewer facilities are available to process material, the question becomes who will do the thinning, fuel reduction and other work needed to change fire behaviour near communities.
Wilson argued that the forest sector cannot simply be treated as separate from wildfire management. In his view, the people and infrastructure needed to manage forests are part of the province’s resilience system.
That raises a difficult policy issue for governments. Funding emergency suppression after a fire starts is visible and politically immediate. Building long term capacity for prevention is slower, more complicated and often less visible to the public.
But Wilson said the consequences of doing too little are already clear in the scale of recent fire seasons.
Climate politics and practical responsibility
The climate debate can become an argument over labels, Wilson claimed, while communities are left asking what will change before the next season.
He questioned whether governments are using wildfire events to advance climate messaging without matching that messaging with enough practical forest management.
The issue is not whether climate change contributes to risk, he explained. It is whether governments are willing to address the work that can be done now, including managing fuels, protecting communities, improving planning and supporting the people who can carry out that work.
The question is particularly relevant in BC, where the forest sector is contracting even as wildfire seasons put greater pressure on rural communities, firefighters and health systems.
Wilson’s message was that there is no single answer. Climate conditions, forest management, public health, infrastructure and economic capacity all shape the outcome. Treating one factor as the entire explanation can make it easier to avoid the harder work of dealing with all of them.
The Really Big Show also interviewed BC's Forestry Minister Ravi Parmer in July and that discussion can be viewed below.
