Comparative Assessment of the Impacts of Prescribed Fire Versus Wildfire (CAIF): A Case Study in the Western U.S. (NFTAQ)
Citation:
Sacks, J. Comparative Assessment of the Impacts of Prescribed Fire Versus Wildfire (CAIF): A Case Study in the Western U.S. (NFTAQ). National Tribal Forum on Air Quality, Tulsa, OK, May 05, 2022.
Impact/Purpose:
Invited presentation on Comparative Assessment of the Impacts of Prescribed Fire versus Wildfire (CAIF): A Case Study in the Western U.S. in a session titled Wildland Fire and Prescribed Burning: The Challenge of Protecting Public Health and Mitigating Devastating Fires and Smoke at the National Tribal Forum on Air Quality.
Description:
Overview of the CAIF report. The Wildland Fire Leadership Council (WFLC) requested that EPA, in collaboration with scientific staff in the U.S. Forest Service (USFS), the Department of the Interior (DOI) and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), conduct an assessment of air quality and health impacts of prescribed fire compared to wildfire. Through two case study fires (Timber Crater 6 [TC6] Fire, Oregon; Rough Fire, California), the assessment used emissions data, air quality modeling, and health impact analyses to examine the corresponding air quality and public health impacts due to actual fires and hypothetical fire scenarios based on different fire management strategies, as well as prescribed fire activity.