The bottom line is, much of North America was under intensive and deliberate vegetation management from the time the glaciers backed off. Indians set fires time and time again where those fires would either help hunting or mess with tribal enemies. Fire was a weapon and a tool, with "natural" fire dominating only in areas where it didn't make sense for an Indian to set a fire.
I wouldn't characterize the fires indians set as intensive management. Lightening created fires burned far more acreage than humans do, even today. Most fires burn only small plots. Some types of forests only burn every few millenniums, some every decade or so, most burn somewhere in between. Without a doubt when indians showed up 20k years ago, they had an effect on the ecosystems, but it's important to remember we had mostly the same ecosystems in between ice ages going back a few million years. Couple million years (at least) before humans appeared in North America we had lots of fires and we had most of the large mammals currently living here existing back then too.
Secondly, it's a bit of a straw man to compare the pitiful few acres the western states own and manage as state forests compared to the the amount of land the feds manage. The western states can't even begin to cough up the money needed to manage 100's millions of acres compared to most western state forests consisting of a few hundred thousand acres. Heck, single BLM Districts in your state or mine manage more land than probably all the western state forests combined.
It still keeps coming back to this: For anybody other than a full blown socialist, we have to have a willing seller for any willing buyer. The American citizens aren't willing sellers.
And secondly, most of the "buyers" advocating federal land transfers have their hand out wanting that land for free. Because the majority of those advocating land transfer are used to getting those traditional natural resources FAR below market value. It's even more foolish to think that's going to happen for free anytime in our lifetimes.
Lastly, sport hunters and anglers are realizing they have something very important in common with environmentalists--preserving habitat.
I know it goes against the "fire's stereotyping, but most environmentalists are not opposed to hunting. It's just the press and media love to report on the extremists. Whether it's the stereotype of all firearm advocates being ignorant beer-swilling rednecks or the stereotype all environmentalists being bunny hugging ignorant anti-gunners.
Most active environmentalists I know may be more likely to have a Sierra Club sticker than a NRA sticker on their truck or Subaru bumper, but they still break out the $150 Monkey Ward '06 with a 40 year old Bushnell scope on it once a year and go elk hunting. Partly because they like elk meat, partly because it's one more great excuse to get "out there".
Casey
