US Forest Service caused largest wildfire in New Mexico history

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

This may be an unpopular opinion, but wildfires are healthy for nature, as they are an important part of the natural life cycle and are vital for regeneration of the landscape.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

This may be an unpopular opinion, but wildfires are healthy for nature, as they are an important part of the natural life cycle and are vital for regeneration of the landscape.

This definitely isn't wrong, and there is indeed a history of land management policies that have made some things worse than they otherwise would be by being overly aggressive in trying to prevent wildfires, but I would note it is an incomplete picture of things. Unless we're going to use eminent domain to reverse human settlement of certain fire-prone areas - which, idk, maybe we should, but that is definitely going to be a difficult sell politically - it's sort of inevitable that we need to contain at least some of the more threatening fires. Even more so when climate change is causing unnatural levels of drought in these areas and thus producing fires on greater scales than would otherwise happen.

Yeah, it's a given we should try to stop some fires, even if a "stop all wildfires, period" policy likely just creates overly large wildfires indirectly by giving them more fuel in the long term.

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

This may be an unpopular opinion, but New Mexico is a state in the American southwest. I know that these are controversial views, but I have never courted popularity. I am a maverick.

I was referring to the views of the general public, not trying to make some bold statement to burnish some kind of forum reputation, if that is what you are insinuating by means of satire (I engage in that business too {only it's directed mainly at RL politicians}, I'd like to think I tend to recognize that stuff when I see it). There are a lot of nuances to environmental management that are reflected in governmental policy and aren't really necessarily understood by the broader electorate, and reflect the various elements of land usage and various needs that have to be fulfilled (see also: wildlife management in places like Yellowstone).

[President Punxsutawney Phil]

This may be an unpopular opinion, but wildfires are healthy for nature, as they are an important part of the natural life cycle and are vital for regeneration of the landscape.

Why would this be an unpopular opinion by any means?

I haven't seen any polling, but I suspect that it would be news that at least a lot of people in the outer reaches of many Western US metropolitan areas wouldn't want to hear.
EDIT: I was ninja'ed by people who put what I was thinking better than I could