>"they were probably understating the problem"

The authors' claim wasn't to give a comprehensive figure of the number of electrocuted birds that caused wildfires, in a specific region over a specific time. Instead, their goal was to establish that electrocuted birds is a significant reason for wildfires, rather than very rare events.

This is useful because, even without a comprehensive figure, the article still provides convincing evidence for companies that may consider upgrading systems to prevent bird electrocution. For example, from the article: "Electric utility companies can insulate wires and install spikes to discourage perching; they could also build structures that allow for safer perching on transformers."