The New York Times has a front page article today on the health effects of fighting wildfires on widlfire crews ("Unmasked in Smoke, Wildfire Crews are Getting Fatally Ill"). The article makes a couple of important points. First, wildland firefighting used to be a seasonal job, but it is becoming a yearround occupation. Second, while urban firefighters typically wear masks when they enter burning buildings, wildfire crews are typically less protected. Third, exposure to wildfire smoke can have cardiovascular, lung and carcinogenic effects. Fourth, the U.S. Forest Service has not embraced the use of masks, arguing that wildfire crews are at risk of overheating if they don masks, though it does use other strategies to reduce smoke exposure. Fifth, the crews themselves often reject wearing masks, though this attitude seems to vary, with younger firefighters more open to wearing masks.
The New York Times investigation suggests another reason that the Forest Service has not embraced masks: costs. It would mean "admitting how dangerous wildfire really is," leading to a "cascade of expensive changes," a daunting prospect for an agency already "underfunded and understaffed." The investigation notes that the Forest Service has ignored its own research that recommends masks.