As the Economist (in a pay-only article) mentioned:

In 1910, the US Forest Service decided that protecting forests from fire was its fundamental obligation. The result is that

Ponderosa pine forests are now dangerously dense. Worse, the forest floor is head-high with brush, making it easy for fires to leap from ground level and take hold on trees that have survived dozens of previous blazes�thus helping to create �megafires.�

The fires will get worse. Wally Covington, a professor of forestry at Northern Arizona University, reckons that 75m acres of western forests are prone to severe wildfire. He recommends thinning forests back to their original density, leaving just two trees for every stump that could be found dating from around 1900 (the assumption being that some of those left standing will die). Fire could then be safely re-introduced to keep down the brush.

Some of the loudest opponents to the idea of returning forests to their native state are environmentalists. Greens are suspicious of any efforts to remove trees from national forests�not least because the Forest Service has often allowed perfectly healthy trees to be logged in the guise of aiding forest health.

But even if thinning the forests might be a solution, the environmentalists also seem to hate the idea that anybody might make money off it.

update: like this Dowdy woman