After the Santa Rosa fires, I attended a talk where representatives from AIG's fire division (they had their own firefighting unit at the time) and CalFire reps were presenting on best practices for fire prevention. This must have been 2018-2019. One thing I learned was a healthy forest has 80-90 trees per acre. California averages 300 trees per acre and at the time was estimated to have a million dead trees. The fuel load is INSANE. Still is and yet, little is done.
I am not giving a pass to insurance carriers here. BUT - it is not a bottomless pool of money. The government plays a huge role in this - they set the terms, they approve the products, the permits to build and they manage the land - or are supposed to theoretically. Personally. I think they like having insurance to be the convenient boogeyman for their failures - intentional and unintentional - because it is an excuse to cry for more tax money- why? You aren't using it properly now, why should you be given more? (I know, I know)
After the Santa Rosa fires, I attended a talk where representatives from AIG's fire division (they had their own firefighting unit at the time) and CalFire reps were presenting on best practices for fire prevention. This must have been 2018-2019. One thing I learned was a healthy forest has 80-90 trees per acre. California averages 300 trees per acre and at the time was estimated to have a million dead trees. The fuel load is INSANE. Still is and yet, little is done.
I am not giving a pass to insurance carriers here. BUT - it is not a bottomless pool of money. The government plays a huge role in this - they set the terms, they approve the products, the permits to build and they manage the land - or are supposed to theoretically. Personally. I think they like having insurance to be the convenient boogeyman for their failures - intentional and unintentional - because it is an excuse to cry for more tax money- why? You aren't using it properly now, why should you be given more? (I know, I know)