Skip to main content
Author(s):
Courtney Schultz, Cassandra Moseley, Adell L. Amos, Christopher Bone, Sarah M. McCaffrey
Year Published:

Cataloging Information

Topic(s):
Fire Policy & Law
Fuels
Fuel Treatments & Effects
Prescribed Fire-use treatments

NRFSN number: 23578
FRAMES RCS number: 63518
Record updated:

Prescribed fire is an essential management tool for restoring and maintaining the resilience of fire-dependent ecosystems. Past studies indicated that the current policy environment significantly constrained decision-making around prescribed fire (USDA & USDOI 2014). This study utilized a mixed methods approach involving spatial analysis, legal analysis, and case studies to identify which policies present the greatest opportunities for change and what the mechanisms are for realizing those opportunities. Our objectives were to: 1) understand the origins of key policy barriers to increasing prescribed burning in the western United States, 2) identify opportunities and mechanisms for change, and 3) disseminate results to policy makers and the fire management community to accelerate learning and change. Key findings can be organized into three sections: spatial, legal, and case studies analyses.

Spatial analyses showed that existing air quality regulations do not appear to have constrained prescribed burning. Air quality measurements on both burn and non-burn days were, for the most part, below EPA thresholds for permitting prescribed burns. There were some notable significant differences in air quality between burn and non-burn days, and in air quality measurements across both state and regional levels, most notably with ozone, PM2.5, PM10, CO2and NO2.

Legal analysis and qualitative interviews showed that air quality laws and regulations were not significant barriers to prescribed burning in most states. Notable exceptions included Oregon and Washington, where state standards for regulating air quality are relatively stricter. Every state was unique in its regulatory structure and interagency partnerships for overseeing air quality impacts from prescribed burning. Case study analysis further indicated that regulations and permitting were not the primary factors limiting the application of prescribed fire in most western states. Rather, key barriers that we identified included: lack of funding and workforce capacity (both field and administrative staff), difficulty sharing resources across and within agencies, administrative barriers and lack of capacity, perceived riskiness and liability for escaped burns, lack of prioritization of prescribed burning compared to wildfire suppression, communication and outreach challenges, and some place-specific challenges. USFS and BLM units were overcoming these challenges through strong leadership, collaborative partnerships and resource-sharing arrangements, building relationships with air quality regulators, seeking additional smoke monitoring, and using more efficient and flexible approaches to planning for opportunities to burn.

Our goal was to identify policy solutions to facilitate more prescribed burning across the West. Notably, we did not find consistent calls for federal policy change. Rather, we found that a multiplicity of strategies that can be tailored to different places will be necessary to increase prescribed burning. We identified four interrelated recommendations for the Forest Service, BLM, and their partners: (1) Prioritize and support prescribed fire with more staff capacity, especially during fire season; (2) Incentivize leaders and staff to build and sustain successful prescribed fire programs; (3) Increase funding and efficiencies for resource sharing, air quality monitoring, and planning; and (4) Ensure regular and consistent air quality-land manager communication through state-level collaborative forums and smoke management liaisons.

Citation

Schultz, Courtney A.; Moseley, Cassandra; Amos, Adell L.; Bone, Christopher E.; McCaffrey, Sarah. 2021. Policy barriers to prescribed fire: identifying opportunities and mechanisms for change - Final Report to the Joint Fire Science Program. JFSP Project No. 16-1-02-08. Fort Collins, CO: Colorado State University. 35 p.

Access this Document