The public health aspect alone completely demolishes the nonsensical assertions of the “let it burn” crowd.
I don’t think scientists and forest managers are talking about allowing areas that are inhabited to burn. At least I hope not. But, I think they are suggesting areas where people do not live or work should be allowed to burn naturally to remove all the built up brush and immature trees and make the forest a lot stronger and help reduce the frequency and strength of the fires.
I don’t think this strategy can happen in places such as Los Angeles but other areas are already doing this.