Driving through the Santa Fe National Forest, it is hard to believe the landscape was once savannah-like, with grassy clearings opening up among the ponderosa pine. Now, there are about 900 trees crowded in each acre where there used to be 40.

“What you see there is 100 years of bad decisions,” said fire ecologist Bill Armstrong. “And now, we’re losing the forests.”

Fire is the keystone process that has been artificially removed from the Southwest’s forests. Low intensity ground fires used to visit tree stands every decade or so, but as more people moved to the area in the late 19th century, an era of fire suppression began. The result is a forest’s worth of kindling ready to ignite at the next lightning strike or downed electrical wire. When compounded with anticipated impacts from climate change ¬– a reduction in mountain snowpack that quenches the forest floor and hotter than average temperatures – the previous century of fire suppression is ushering a new era of the mega fire.

Armstrong fights forest fires as part of his job, but he much prefers lighting them. He believes the only real hope to prevent monster fires in the future is to get to the forests first. “In the Southwest, fire is inevitable,” he said. “The choice is not whether the forests burn or not; the choice is how they burn.”

By reintroducing fire to the landscape through prescribed burns, the Forest Service can restore tracts of forest that actually thrive on fire. Armstrong is working to implement thinning projects across the Santa Fe National Forest. But with so much fuel in the forests, progress is slow and people are cautious. “I can see public opinion and politics changing around prescribed burning, but it’s not fast enough,” he said. “Without it, the future of forests is one of big fires, and then what’s left is left.”