Comparative Assessment of the Impacts of Prescribed Fire Versus Wildfire (CAIF): A Case Study in the Western U.S. (Peer Review Draft)
Notice - This site contains archived material(s)
Archive disclaimer
Archive
disclaimer
Archived files are provided for reference
purposes only. These files are no longer maintained by the Agency and may be outdated. For
current EPA information, go to www.epa.gov. It is EPA's policy to
support reasonable accommodation to persons with disabilities, pursuant to the Rehabilitation
Act of 1973, 29 U.S.C. 791. If you need assistance with accessing archived files, contact
EPA's Reasonable Accommodations
or submit a request using the Contact Us form.
Abstract
The increasing severity of and acres burned by wildfires in the U.S. are due to various factors (e.g., fire suppression, changing climate, growth of wildland-urban interface). To mitigate these catastrophic wildfires, there is an increased likelihood of the expanded use of prescribed fires as a forest management tool. As such, the Wildland Fire Leadership Council (WFLC), which is an intergovernmental committee consisting of federal, state, tribal, county and municipal government officials chaired by senior leadership in the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and Department of Interior (DOI), at a January 2020 meeting charged EPA with leading an assessment to examine the air quality and health impacts of prescribed fire versus wildfire in collaboration with the U.S. Forest Service (USFS) and DOI.
In the U.S. with the growth in the number of large wildfires (> 100,000 acres) and acres burned, there is a need to understand the air quality and public health implications of different fire management strategies. With scientific staff in ORD (CPHEA, CEMM, CESER) and OAR (OAQPS [AQAD and HEID], OTAQ), in collaboration with staff from USFS, DOI, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), EPA led the development of the CAIF Report to characterize the impacts of different fire management strategies, including prescribed fire, compared to wildfire.
Impact/Purpose
Status
Citation
This download(s) is distributed solely for the purpose of pre-dissemination peer review under applicable information quality guidelines. It has not been formally disseminated by EPA. It does not represent and should not be construed to represent any Agency determination or policy.
- Comparative Assessment of the Impacts of Prescribed Fire Versus Wildfire (CAIF): A Case Study in the Western U.S.(Peer Review Draft) (PDF) (361 pp, 12 MB, about PDF)
- External Letter Peer Review of Report “Comparative Assessment of the Impacts of Prescribed Fire Versus Wildfire (CAIF): A Case Study in the Western U.S. (PDF) (118 pp, 1 MB, about PDF)
- EPA Response to the External Letter Peer Review Report on Comparative Assessment of the Impacts of Prescribed Fire Versus Wildfire (CAIF): A Case Study in the Western U.S. (2021) (PDF) (89 pp, 672 KB, about PDF)
- Peer Review Charge (PDF) (3 pp, 204 KB, about PDF)