BROOMFIELD, Colo.—Colorado’s top wildfire officials said they expect a significantly increased risk of wildfire this summer—and while they’ll partner with neighboring states as much as they can, resources for fighting the blazes will be tested. 

A dismal snowpack this winter is likely to leave a parched landscape and tinderbox conditions from Colorado’s thickly forested ski mountains to its grassy eastern plains. Officials here are anticipating an exceptionally dire next few months in their state and beyond. 

“The increased fire risk extends to the multi-state region,” Colorado’s Democratic governor, Jared Polis, said during the state’s annual wildfire outlook briefing in Broomfield on April 30, where officials laid out Colorado’s 2026 Wildfire Preparedness Plan. 

The upcoming summer will be challenging across the West, he said, with an “elevated fire risk” threatening Utah, New Mexico and Arizona, alongside Colorado. 

Strained Resources Across the West

Surrounded by the state’s top fire managers on Thursday, Polis said Colorado has state-of-the-art assets to fight and prevent fires from the air and ground. 

Such resources have increased in the two terms since he took office, said the outgoing, term-limited governor in his final fire briefing. Three of the largest fires in the state’s history raged during his eight years in office, he said, including the late-December grass-fueled Marshall Fire in 2021 that burned more than 1,000 homes in a Boulder suburb. 

“We have two state-owned multimission aircraft,” Polis said. “We have single-engine tankers, we have leased large air tankers, we own type 1 and type 2 helicopters for rapid response, multiple engines, multiple hand crews and more intelligence—both satellite-based and aerial-based—than ever before. While the risks have increased, our preparedness has grown exponentially.” 

As for helping other Western states with its unique backbone of resources, Polis said he would consider it on a case-by-case basis, but the priority will be within Colorado’s own borders. 

“The advantage of being able to control the resources is that we want to be able to have rapid response here,” he said. “And we don’t want to sacrifice that.”

The state’s increased wildfire risk stems from the impacts of climate change, drought and a growing population, which has led people to move further into the Wildland Urban Interface, or WUI, where homes and communities abut flammable wild landscapes, Polis said. 

Matt McCombs, who leads Colorado’s State Forest Service, said more than half of Colorado residents live in the WUI. “Ultimately, Coloradans know—we all understand—we have to learn to live with wildland fire,” he said. 

So far this year, 24,222 fires have burned nearly two million acres across the country, significantly surpassing the 10-year average for acreage burned by this time of year. In an average year, Colorado sees between 6,000 and 7,000 wildfires. Its largest fires are human-caused and the origins of many of them are unknown.

In Colorado, during the first 117 days of 2026, the state dropped more than 200,000 gallons of water and fire retardant from the air on over 50 days of flight missions, said Stan Hilkey, the director of the state’s Department of Public Safety. 

“We are facing a very challenging fire year where our resources will be tested across not only Colorado but across the West,” said Michael Morgan, director of the state’s Division of Fire Prevention & Control. 

Federal Friction

At the federal level, the Departments of Interior and Agriculture have announced a new U.S. Wildland Fire Service. 

Inside Climate News has previously reported that layoffs, confusion and budget cuts have sparked doubts about the agency. 

Paul Hohn, the geographic area fire chief for the Rocky Mountain region of the U.S. Wildland Fire Service, said on Thursday that the agency has the same amount of staffing that it had last year in what he called the “legacy” bureaus.

“I know that some federal agencies went through some deferred resignation programs and there were some positions that were not allowed to be rehired over the last couple years,” he said. “That has not applied to firefighters and fire support personnel.”

As Colorado prepares and coordinates its response for a potentially devastating summer, state officials have dealt with friction with the federal government under the new administration of Republican President Donald Trump. 

Earlier this month, Polis criticized the feds for denying his appeals to declare two wildfires as major disasters. He said such actions make the recovery process harder, slower and more difficult. 

“We hope that that federal partnership comes back with disasters that we’ve counted on for years,” he said. “If that’s going away, as it seems to be with the denial—not just of Colorado’s but a number of disaster declarations—that would fundamentally change the nature of the federal relationship with the states. And it would hurt fire preparedness and recovery across all fifty states.”

Last week, Colorado’s two Democratic U.S. senators, Michael Bennet and John Hickenlooper, introduced legislation, the “Disaster Declaration Transparency Act of 2026,” that would allow Congress to override the president’s denial of disaster declarations.

The FEMA press office declined to comment on the bill. 

“Rapid, Aggressive Initial Attack”

Days before Colorado’s annual fire briefing, two of the state’s former governors authored a provocative guest column in The Denver Post.

In it, Democrat Bill Ritter and Republican Bill Owens castigated unnamed “loud voices” opposed to forest management, such as strategic thinning, fuel reduction, clearing and prescribed burns when appropriate. 

“Colorado needs a more mature conversation, especially as we deal with prolonged drought, warming temperatures, pine and Ponderosa beetles, and other threats to forest health,” they wrote. “Stewardship is not abuse. Forest management is not the enemy of healthy ecosystems. If anything, refusing to use proven tools in fire-prone landscapes is its own kind of recklessness.” 

Coloradans, the former governors said, “deserve better than another season of hand-wringing followed by disaster. They deserve leaders willing to act before the emergency, not just speak solemnly after it.” 

Polis said in an interview on Thursday that he had not yet read the column, but stressed that his state is “light years” ahead of where it was a decade ago. “I’m very confident in saying we are better prepared with more resources than Colorado has ever had before for fires,” he said.

In recent decades, the U.S. Forest Service has backed away from the aggressive suppression tactics of its 1935 “10 a.m. policy,” which aimed to prevent catastrophes by putting out fires as quickly as possible. 

That policy continued until the early 1970s, when scientific research increasingly demonstrated the positive effects of fire in forest ecology and suggested that suppression makes wildfires that survive initial attack more severe. Allowing wildfires to burn safely has been a critical tool to address the growing crisis. 

At Thursday’s briefing, Morgan, Colorado’s fire czar, said most of the state’s strategies this year will focus on “rapid, aggressive initial attack” to keep fires from growing. 

“Every ignition we can stop, that’s one less stressed-out, overworked firefighter,” Morgan said.

Polis has declared May as Wildfire Awareness Month and urged Coloradans to do their part. 

With a demanding fire season on the horizon, officials emphasized the need to reduce pressure on firefighters where possible. Hilkey, the public safety director, asked citizens to step up by making fire awareness a part of their everyday life. 

“We want to make sure everybody starts thinking like a firefighter,” he said. 

In the meantime, McCombs, of Colorado’s State Forest Service, stressed the importance of mitigation work that reduces burnable fuel to stop fires from turning into the kinds of devastating out-of-control blazes that have turned large areas into hellscapes and burned thousands of homes.

That and other investments, such as home-hardening, might not make headlines, he said, but they pay off in prevention.

On Thursday, Polis acknowledged that in Colorado, the process of prescribed burning for mitigation can require extensive documentation, preparation and assessment of various environmental conditions. And he signaled an appetite for potentially lessening some of the bureaucracy involved, saying it “sounds like an awful lot of paperwork.”

While Colorado’s top fire officials predicted a doozie of a year, they said there is only so much the state can do in response. The real work begins at the individual level. 

“Doing your part to protect your home, protect your community, prevent fires from starting in the form of fuels treatments, resiliency of your own home, and any place you can,” Morgan said. “That’s what’s going to make the difference in the short term and the long haul for the future of Colorado and across our West.” 

Nolan Diffley, Aeva Dye, Anna Hay, Shaden Higgs, Corey Hutchins, Rowan Keller, Sol Lorio, Rachel Phillips, Josefina Rodriguez-Poggio and Amelia Vinton contributed to this report as students and staff in the Colorado College Career Catalyst Block “Burning Questions: Wildfire Journalism & Ecology at Colorado Firecamp.”

A 5-year-old New Mexico girl survived more than 30 hours trapped in a truck that crashed and killed her parents on May 1 in southern Colorado, according to first responders.

The Upper Pine River Fire Protection called it “both a tragedy and a miracle” for the girl in a Facebook post.

The vehicle was not discovered until May 2, according to a Colorado State Patrol news release. Police believed the blue Chevrolet S-10 pickup went off the south shoulder of Highway 160 near milepost 104, just east of Bayfield, around 6 a.m. on May 1, rolled over an unknown number of times and came to rest on its roof.

CSP said three occupants were in the truck. Devante Griffin, 25, the driver, and Klariza Tarango, 24, both of Farmington, New Mexico, were pronounced dead at the scene. A 5-year-old girl, identified in media reports as their daughter. was taken to an area hospital for injuries and has been released to family.

What caused the crash?

Colorado State Patrol were still investigating the accident on May 5. A news release said “impairment and excessive speed are not being investigated as factors leading to this crash” at this time.

It also said no charges are expected to be filed in the case.

Why did nobody see the truck sooner?

CSP said in the release that the location was not visible from the road.

Nate Trela covers trending news in Colorado and Utah for the USA TODAY Network.

Budget gaps in cities across Colorado have made it more difficult to experiment with basic income programs despite their benefits, and experts argue that lack of municipal support could stifle the growth of programs intended to give unconditional payments to people to help pay for basic needs. 

Last week, the Colorado legislature approved a spending package of more than $46.8 billion, and it includes deep cuts to Medicaid and other state services to cover a $1.5 billion budget shortfall. Cities like Denver, Boulder and Colorado Springs have also had to pare back services and programs to cover budget shortfalls. 

Even so, Colorado’s economic conditions appear ripe for experimenting with basic income programs as the cost of living continues to soar. The Colorado Polling Institute’s April statewide poll shows that many voters agree with that assessment — more than 90% identified the cost of housing, healthcare, food and insurance as problems, with more than 44% calling each category a “very big problem.” 

“In a world of finite budgets, we need to figure out what works and move away from what doesn’t,” said Kaitlyn Sims, an assistant professor of public policy at the Josef Korbel School of Global and Public Affairs at the University of Denver. She and other experts convened for the Basic Income Programs in Denver and Beyond panel during Colorado SunFest 2026 on Friday.

What is basic income?

“Basic income” is most commonly known as a periodic, unconditional cash payment to all members of a community. 

That is different from “guaranteed income,” which refers to an unconditional cash payment to members of a specific group, such as students, new mothers or people who are homeless, even though the two programs are commonly confused for one another. 

Basic income is not a new idea, but it has gained steam since the COVID-19 pandemic. In the 1970s, former President Richard Nixon floated the idea of instituting a national basic income program to replace federal spending on social services. 

Today, there are more than 80 basic income pilot programs either active or planned, according to the Income Movement, a nationwide coalition of lawmakers advocating for basic income pilots. More than 75,000 participants across 35 cities have received cash through these programs. 

The idea behind the programs is that if people have help with basic income, it can bring stability in the workforce because people can afford to get to work and have childcare, housing stability, food security and better overall health with less stress about finances.

There are basic income-esque programs already in place across the country. In Colorado, the Family Affordability Tax Credit pays qualifying households $3,200 per child under age 6 and $2,400 per child between ages 6 and 16. 

Another example is the Alaska Permanent Fund, a public program that pays state residents an annual dividend from oil sales.  

Michigan’s Rx Kids program also fits the basic income mold. The program offers households an unconditional payment of $1,500 during pregnancy and $500 a month during the first year of a child’s life. 

How does basic income work?

Denver was home to one of the nation’s largest basic income experiments. Between 2022 and 2025, the Denver Basic Income Project distributed more than $10.8 million to over 800 people experiencing homelessness who were categorized into three groups. 

Group 1 received $1,000 per month for 12 months; Group 2 received $6,500 up front and $500 per month for a year; and Group 3, also known as the “active comparison” group, received $50 a month. Every participant also received a cellphone and a bank card. 

The funding was pooled from a variety of sources, including capital gains realized by program founder Mark Donovan’s investments and a $4 million investment from the city of Denver, funded by the federal American Rescue Plan Act. 

The results of the program were “mixed,” according to Daniel Brisson, another Colorado SunFest panelist and the director of DU’s Center for Housing and Homelessness Research, but not in a “good or bad” kind of way. 

“There is so much happening in so many different directions,” Brisson said. 

All three groups improved housing outcomes, reduced the number of days they spent in hospitals and jails, and improved self-sufficiency, according to the program’s randomized control trial data. 

Perhaps most significantly, Brisson noted several subjective findings that point to the power of basic income. For instance, participants reported in surveys that they felt trusted, a rarity in traditional social services, which are often paternalistic. 

Some participants also reported spending their money to help friends and family in need, which speaks to how basic income can repair or strengthen relationships and foster a sense of belonging. 

“Many people took it as a sign that this meant something, and they were supposed to make something of it,” Brisson said. 

Despite the impact, the Denver Basic Income Project stopped issuing cash payments in September 2025 after Denver’s government decided not to reinvest in the program due to budget constraints. 

Other challenges

Basic income pilots also face headwinds outside of funding. 

The Foundation for Government Accountability, which advocates adding work requirements to social services, has urged local governments to ban basic income programs, arguing that they “discourage work and are a drag on the economy.”

Some state officials have also successfully used the courts to shut down basic income programs. Texas Attorney General Ken Paxton convinced a local court in 2025 that Harris County’s basic income pilot violated the Texas Constitution’s prohibition on giving public money to individuals. The lawsuit forced the Harris County program to reallocate its funding.  

Some studies have also suggested that implementing basic income programs could increase poverty, since some proponents view them as a replacement for social services, thereby reducing the government workforce. Other studies suggest basic income could increase inflation by giving people more money to spend, similar to the pandemic stimulus checks. 

Sims noted that the potential disruptions to the government workforce are “concerning” and could lead to a significant increase in unemployment. She added that concerns about inflation are likely overblown unless a basic income pilot is paying participants a living wage. 

Right place, right time

Despite the challenges, basic income could help Coloradans navigate some budding economic issues, according to Scott Wasserman, a panelist and founder of the political consulting group Thinking Forward. 

Wasserman pointed to the latest Colorado Polling Institute data showing that 68% of Coloradans are concerned about artificial intelligence replacing their job. That’s compared with 63% of voters nationally who share the same concerns. Those pressures are being felt by high-income earners, like lawyers and doctors, and low-income earners in jobs like manufacturing. 

Meanwhile, Wasserman said many Coloradans support basic income programs that provide a “big dose” of help, especially for those living in poverty. He cited a privately funded poll that found 56% of voters support paying new parents, people experiencing homelessness and low-income households $500 per month. 

“There is political will,” Wasserman said. “I was a little shocked.”