Baker vs. Fule et al.

Baker understandably found that Fule et al. calibration was not enough to develop current management of fire regime on the forested lands at the Grand Canyon and other forest lands. He goes on to say that it was of no use if it cannot accurately estimate the population mean fire interval because its numerical value weighs heavy on the numerical value on sample size. He identifies that the Grand Canyon calibration shows the population mean fire intervals and rotations may be as much as 10 times as long as estimated by the composite fire interval method used by Fule et al. He acknowledges that Fule's calibration admits re-evaluation is a good idea for National Parks like Grand Canyon where there are efforts moving to reduce the fire risk and restore fire in the ongoing restoration efforts. 

In Fule et al. the "uncertainties" in fire scar studies are identified: 1) the fire may not have left a record (scar) in every burn location, 2) severe fires that followed may have erased records of previous burns, and 3) sampling may not detect all past fires, even if a record exists. The paper also notes the "limitation" in the calibration as being 1) some additional small fires are probably missed and 2) all fires, including pre-1880 and present, burn with a mosaic of intensities and include unburned areas with the perimeter of the overall fire perimeter. Fule summarizes that understanding these limitations of physical record left behind, sampling capability, and the burning variability the methodology of this study appears to be a consistent and accurate approach in the reconstruction the history of fire. 

This part leaves me confused as it seems he is admitting the limitations but claims they still work in providing a consistent and accurate approach to reconstruction. May be this would be acceptable if he said the methodology could be a component of the reconstruction to hopefully achieve a more accurate and consistent history of fire.

I have to agree with Baker that if this methodology rely on fire history research that uses composite fire interval and research that is missing an adequate analysis of past high-severity fire then these actions are also missing  sound science-based information.