An article on Reason, and the associated video, claim that the severity of the recent forest fires are largely due to environmental regulations that prevent good forest management, along with an insistence on putting out small fires that would have cleared the undergrowth. Quotes from the article:
California warmed 3 degrees over the past 50 years, but that's not the main cause of California's fires, no matter how often politicians and the media say it is.
But for years, governments and environmentalists put out every small fire they could, while also fighting logging.
For years, [politicians] and environmentalists increased the risk of big fires by opposing the thinning of forests.
The town of Berry Creek, California, tried to get permits to legally clear their forest. For two years, regulators delayed approval. This year, fire destroyed the town.
I'm aware of this question which says that government fire-suppression efforts are largely responsible for the amount of fuel in the forests, but I want to know if it was the environmental movement that was responsible for this, and if other environmental policies, especially tree protection in general, were also significant contributors to the severity of the fires.