Absolutely. In places where lodgepole pine would have been mixed with other species, and today where it is currently mixed with other species, I would highly recommend that you remove the lodgepole and let the other species dominate the site.
In other areas, where lodgepole pine is uniform—which is a massive area, the Chilcotin plateau being almost uniformly lodgepole pine, at least historically—it's a different thing. In that particular case, those trees and that ecosystem is fire-adapted and is dependent upon fire to be renewed periodically.
The problem we have is that, through clear-cut harvesting, we can't quite emulate the pattern of disturbance of fire, because we cut with cut-blocks that are limited to 50 hectares in size, with certain adjacency rules that typically create a little checkerboard pattern. You've seen this if you've flown from Kelowna to Vancouver. It is a very susceptible landscape to the spread of disturbance, whether it be insects or fire.
Historically, fire would have burned predominantly small patches, but the occasional large patch of perhaps 10,000 hectares would have been burned. Unfortunately, I don't think we could convince the public that a 10,000 hectare clear-cut would be the wisest ecological choice.