Forests evolved over hundreds of millions of years with fire. Fire keeps forests healthy and in balance but the problem is with so many homes moving into forests that can't allow for a "let burn" policy other than in places the like the Gila NF here in NM and Yellowstone Nat. Park where there is little population.
Personally I think the negative impacts will be more on home owners and insurance companies than the forests themselves. The forest in high intensity crown fires will look horrible for ten or twenty years but in low and moderate intensity burns the forest recovers and is more healthy in less than a year. Also, Aspen roots are often already in place and huge Aspen groves can begin growing almost immediately where there were crown fires. In the Gila NF less than 20% of the burns were high intensity because they have allowed fires to burn there for 40 years so there wasn't that much fuel. The reason that fire spread to be so huge was because of high winds and because they pretty much allowed it to burn but steering it away from the hand full of houses in the area.
Probably more homes will be burned due to the cut back backs because in National Forests that have a lot of population and towns are not allowed to have a let burn policy for good reason but the cut backs mean it's harder for the FS to have the man power to clean out brush and cut down small trees where the forest is too dense. But keep in mind the SW had a La Nina last winter so forests are extremely dry right now. El Nino is predicted for the coming winter so there probably won't be many fires in the SW next summer unless El Nino fails to develop but even if it does we will probably have more normal precipitation.
Fires help keep the forest healthy but it's sad to see people lose their homes. I think the lesson is to cut down any trees right next to your house and clear out any brush.
Watch the following videos as they give a good summary of why fire is good for forests.
= new reply since forum marked as read