Air Quality, Atmosphere & Health

, Volume 10, Issue 1, pp 33–36 | Cite as

Forest fire policy: change conventional thinking of smoke management to prioritize long-term air quality and public health

  • D. W. Schweizer
  • R. Cisneros


Wildland fire smoke is inevitable. Size and intensity of wildland fires are increasing in the western USA. Smoke-free skies and public exposure to wildland fire smoke have effectively been postponed through suppression. The historic policy of suppression has systematically both instilled a public expectation of a smoke-free environment and deferred emissions through increased forest fuel loads that will lead to an eventual large spontaneous release. High intensity fire smoke is impacting a larger area including high density urban areas. Policy change has largely attempted to provide the avenue for increased use of ecologically beneficial fire but allows for continued reliance on suppression as a primary tool for a smoke averse population. While understanding the essential role of suppression in protection of life and property, we dispute the efficacy of attempting to eliminate smoke exposure through suppression in a fire prone area to protect human health at the population level. Sufficient consideration to future negative health outcomes needs to be considered in fire management decisions. It is likely that long term air quality is inextricably linked to ecosystem health in the Sierra Nevada. We contend that landscape use of ecological fire is essential to forest and human health. Radical change is needed where beneficial wildland fire smoke is treated as natural background and exempted from much of the regulation applied to anthropogenic sources. Tolerance of the measured release of routine smoke emissions from beneficial fire is needed. Using present air quality standards in the more remote areas will provide an opportunity to increase burning in many forests while protecting public health.


Widland fire Air quality Policy Public health Smoke management 


  1. Baker W (2014) Historical forest structure and fire in Sierran mixed-conifer forests reconstructed from General Land Office survey data. Ecosphere 5:79. doi: 10.1890/ES14-00046.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boer MM, Price OF, Bradstock RA (2015) Wildfires: weigh policy effectiveness. Science 350:920–920. doi: 10.1126/science.350.6263.920-a CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Cisneros R, Schweizer D, Preisler H, et al. (2014) Spatial and seasonal patterns of particulate matter less than 2.5 microns in the Sierra Nevada Mountains, California. Atmos Pollut Res 5:581–590. doi: 10.5094/APR.2014.067 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Cisneros R, Schweizer D, Zhong S, et al. (2012) Analysing the effects of the 2002 McNally fire on air quality in the San Joaquin Valley and southern Sierra Nevada, California. Int J Wildland Fire 21:1065–1075. doi: 10.1071/wf11025 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Dellasala DA, Williams JE, Williams CD, Franklin JF (2004) Beyond smoke and mirrors: a synthesis of fire policy and science. Conserv Biol 18:976–986. doi: 10.1111/j.1523-1739.2004.00529.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Exceptional Events Rule (2007) Part II Environmental Protection Agency 40 CFR parts 50 and 51 treatment of data influenced by exceptional events; Final Rule.Google Scholar
  7. Hurteau M, North M (2009) Fuel treatment effects on tree-based forest carbon storage and emissions under modeled wildfire scenarios. Front Ecol Environ 7:409–414. doi: 10.1890/080049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Hurteau MD, Koch GW, Hungate BA (2008) Carbon protection and fire risk reduction: toward a full accounting of forest carbon offsets. Front Ecol Environ 6:493–498. doi: 10.1890/070187 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hurteau MD, Westerling AL, Wiedinmyer C, Bryant BP (2014) Projected effects of climate and development on California wildfire emissions through 2100. Environ Sci Technol 48:2298–2304. doi: 10.1021/es4050133 Google Scholar
  10. Kilgore B (1981) Fire in ecosystem distribution and structure: western forests and scrublands. HA Mooney, TM Bonnicksen, NL Christ. Proc. Conf. Fire Regimes Ecosyst. Prop. pp. 58–89. USDA For. Serv. Gen. Tech. Rep. WO-GTR-26 58–89.Google Scholar
  11. North MP, Stephens SL, Collins BM, et al. (2015a) Reform forest fire management. Science 349:1280–1281. doi: 10.1126/science.aab2356 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. North MP, Stephens SL, Collins BM, et al. (2015b) Wildfires—response. Science 350:920–921. doi: 10.1126/science.350.6263.920-c CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Parks SA, Holsinger LM, Miller C, Nelson CR (2015) Wildland fire as a self-regulating mechanism: the role of previous burns and weather in limiting fire progression. Ecol Appl 25:1478–1492. doi: 10.1890/14-1430.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Schweizer D, Cisneros R (2014) Wildland fire management and air quality in the southern Sierra Nevada: using the lion fire as a case study with a multi-year perspective on PM2.5 impacts and fire policy. J Environ Manag 144:265–278. doi: 10.1016/j.jenvman.2014.06.007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Steel ZL, Safford HD, Viers JH (2015) The fire frequency-severity relationship and the legacy of fire suppression in California forests. Ecosphere 6:8. doi: 10.1890/ES14-00224.1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Stevens JT, Safford HD, Latimer AM (2014) Wildfire-contingent effects of fuel treatments can promote ecological resilience in seasonally dry conifer forests. Can J For Res 44:843–854. doi: 10.1139/cjfr-2013-0460 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Swetnam TW, Baisan CH, Caprio AC, et al. (2009) Multi-millennial fire history of the Giant Forest, Sequoia National Park, California, USA. Fire Ecol 5:120–150. doi: 10.4996/fireecology.0503120 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Thompson M, Dunn C, Calkin D (2015) Wildfires: systemic changes required. Science 350:920. doi: 10.1126/science.350.6263.920-b CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Topik C (2015) Wildfires burn science capacity. Science 349:1263–1263. doi: 10.1126/science.aad4202 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Westerling AL, Hidalgo HG, Cayan DR, Swetnam TW (2006) Warming and earlier spring increase western U.S. forest wildfire activity. Science 313:940–943. doi: 10.1126/science.1128834 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of CaliforniaMercedUSA

Personalised recommendations