The debate has been going on for decades — should loggers rush in after a wildfire and cut down the recently killed trees while they are still merchantable, or could natural processes be allowed to run their course? Timber companies, some politicians, and the U.S. Forest Service often argue for the first option, while some scientists and environmental groups advocate for the natural alternative.

Below is an excerpt from an article in the Los Angeles Times:

…The Forest Service and timber companies say that the dead wood must be removed before the forest can grow and that shrubs have to be killed off with herbicides so the conifers have sun to grow again.

Though part of the Las Conchas fire site was salvage-logged, another section outside New Mexico’s remote Jemez Springs was not.

Four years after the blaze, the Jemez Springs area today is alive with Gambel oak and three-toed woodpeckers, along with occasional conifer saplings growing amid the brush.

“See this?” Hanson said, pulling back a strand of oak to reveal a rubbery green pine sapling just an inch tall. “They said this wouldn’t be here, but we found it. And there’s more.”

By contrast, in places like California’s Rim fire site, salvage crews immediately began felling burned pines and dying trees, spraying the area with herbicide and planting conifer saplings. The result is little ground vegetation but stands of artificially planted conifers returning apace…