Is there any sense in "saving" a forest which has burned totally to the ground? Perhaps someone needs to propose that once a forest has been so totally flattened it no longer needs "protection" and the land should be freed for development.
Note that this could be dangerous in that it could encourage would-be developers to use arson to clear lands, but it would adjust the incentives for environmentalists.
Having just returned from Yosemite, I noticed vast areas of blackened trees and the skeletons of dead trees. In between these dead trees were new trees cropping up. (It looked like a checkerboard - alternating dead trees and live trees.) The dead trees will eventually decompose, leaving behind the new growth (which will then be much taller). That's the reason - to save the new forest, which is in the process of growing.