I think, or at least my uncle the forest ranger did, one of the problems with how we manage/prevent fires is the human view that anything destructive of property is bad. It's bad when a house burns down. A family is now without a home.
Ergo, if a section of forest burns, it is bad. Animals lose their homes and habitat (nature's way of controlling overpopulation?) and even worse, from a human perspective, the timber burned could have been logged.
Never mind it's natures way of starting the cycle over again and keeping the forest healthy.
This was my uncle's viewpoint. I don't know if it is shared by the entire forestry industry per se.