California intentionally burns like only half of the area as Minnesota, despite being like twice as big.
Arkansas, GA, SC, etc all burn like 5-10x what CA does, for prevention purposes.
Growing up outside of the West and moving to the West later, I was shocked how little controlled burns there are here.
CARB has been researching the issue of prescribed burns for decades and ever since the mid to late 2010s is completely on board, but the air districts are slower to follow. On top of that, the difference in land management priorities between the National Forest Service, BLM, and the State of California complicates everything. One of the best arguments for the Federal government divesting of its land in the west is to allow the states to better manage their own resources (states' rights comes full circle).
I live in ATL and just drove back home from being up north for thanksgiving, drove through a huge prescribed burn on the way a few days ago.
Well the wildfire arsonists take care of the other half.
(I'm serious, not joking. You don't need to do a controlled burn if the wildfire already did one for you.)
That seems to get cause and effect backwards. Had California done more controlled burns, then they wouldn't have had nearly as many disastrous wildfires.