Ecological effects of fire fighting foams and retardants: a summary

Adams, Robyn; Simmons, Dianne

doi:10.1080/00049158.1999.10674797

Cited by 52 publications

(26 citation statements)

References 11 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…A brief discussion of fire retardant effects on water quality is provided here to acquaint the reader with the topic. More detailed reviews and studies have been completed by Labat and Anderson Inc. (1994), Adams and Simmons (1999), Kalabokidis (2000), and Gimenez and others (2004). The main environmental concerns with fire retardant use are: (1) effects on water quality and aquatic organisms, (2) toxicity to vegetation, and (3) human health effects.…”

Section: Fire Retardants _________________mentioning

confidence: 99%

Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on soils and water

Neary¹,

Ryan²,

DeBano³

2005

452

369

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

_____________________________________ Neary, Daniel G.; Ryan, Kevin C.; DeBano, Leonard F., eds. 2005. (revised 2008This state-of-knowledge review about the effects of fire on soils and water can assist land and fire managers with information on the physical, chemical, and biological effects of fire needed to successfully conduct ecosystem management, and effectively inform others about the role and impacts of wildland fire. Chapter topics include the soil resource, soil physical properties and fire, soil chemistry effects, soil biology responses, the hydrologic cycle and water resources, water quality, aquatic biology, fire effects on wetland and riparian systems, fire effects models, and watershed rehabilitation.

show abstract

Section: Fire Retardants _________________mentioning

confidence: 99%

Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on soils and water

Neary¹,

Ryan²,

DeBano³

2005

452

369

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The effects of LTRs on the vegetation and soil in eastern Australian heathlands were the subject of two research reports by Bell [3] and Gould et al [7] respectively. Reviews of the environmental impact of LTRs have been reported by Adams and Simmons [1], Kalabokidis [10] and Gimenez et al [6]. It should be noted that there is still lack of studies in the Mediterranean region, which is an area prone to wildland fires [2].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Nitrogen leaching from a forest soil exposed to fire retardant with and without fire: A laboratory study

2008

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

-The application of Long Term fire Retardants (LTRs) for forest fire prevention and/or suppression purposes can result in chemicals leaching, from soil to the drainage water, during the annual rain fall period. In leachates, large concentrations of nitrogen (N), one of the major components of LTRs, could affect the groundwater quality. N leaching due to the application of a nitrogen phosphate based LTR was studied in laboratory microcosms. The concentrations of nitrate (NO − 3 -N) and ammonium nitrogen (NH + 4 -N) were measured in the resulting leachates from pots with forest soil and pine seedlings (Pinus halepensis) alone and in combination with fire. Up to 30% of the total N in the retardant was lost to leaching, primarily as NO − 3 -N. The vegetation seems to decrease to some extent the N leaching. The N leaching from treated pots with a burnt tree is lower compared with that from treated pots with a living tree, due to the partial N volatilization during the fire. Although this is a laboratory study, these results may be considered as rough indications of LTR environmental implications, due to the leaching of a significant part of the retardant's N into groundwater.

show abstract

“…Since most fire-fighting chemicals are typically applied in environmentally sensitive areas, natural areas and areas set aside for wildlife, there is a need to determine their potential effects on terrestrial and aquatic ecosystems (Basanta et al, 2002). There is a great deal of information regarding the effects of fire-fighting chemicals on plants and animals, both aquatic and terrestrial (Larson and Duncan, 1982;Bradstock et al, 1987;Gaikowski et al, 1996;MacDonald et al, 1996MacDonald et al, , 1997Adams and Simmons, 1999;Larson et al, 2000;Giménez et al, 2004;Hartskeerl, et al, 2004;Bell et al, 2005). Conversely, in spite of its interest, the effects of these compounds on the soil have scarcely been studied (see Giménez et al, 2004).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Short- and medium-term effects of three fire fighting chemicals on the properties of a burnt soil

Couto-Vázquez

González-Prieto

2006

Science of The Total Environment

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The impact of three fire fighting chemicals (FFC) on 11 chemical soil properties and on soil recovery (0-2 cm depth) was evaluated 1, 30, 90 and 365 d after a prescribed fire. Five treatments were considered: unburnt soil (US) and burnt soil with 2 l m -2 of water alone (BS) or mixed with the foaming agent Auxquímica RFC-88 at 1% (BS+Fo), Firesorb at 1.5% (BS+Fi) and FR Cross ammonium polyphosphate at 20% (BS+Ap). At t=1 d, soil pH increases in the order US < BS . BS+Fo, BS+Fi < BS+Ap, which was most likely due to the accumulation of ashes, the reduction of organic acids and the cations supplied by FFC. In all burnt treatments, soil pH remained significantly higher than in US up until t=90 d. SOM richness remained similar and constant until t=90 d in all plots, but, probably due to fire-triggered erosion, at t=365 d it was significantly lower in BS+Ap (C, N), BS and BS+Fo (C) than in US. Immediately after the fire, soil * + -N levels in BS+Ap (200x that of US; 9-18x those of BS, BS+Fo and BS+Fi), and its persistence can delay the post-fire vegetation recovery due to the toxicity of NH 4 + to seeds and seedlings. NO 3 -N levels changed significantly only in BS+Ap between t=30 and t=90 d due to the nitrification of its large NH 4 + -N pool. Except in BS+Ap, whose soil P levels were 70-140x (t=1 d) and 10-20x (t=365 d) higher than in the other treatments, available P content in BS and BS+FFC was not significatively higher than in US. The concentrations of available cations in BS and BS+FFC were higher (not always significatively, except for K) than in US until t=90 d, likely due to ashes-and FFC-derived cations. Contrarily to divalent cations, monovalent cations (more soluble and easily leached) decreased slowly until t=90 d.

show abstract

Ecological effects of fire fighting foams and retardants: a summary

Cited by 52 publications

References 11 publications

Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on soils and water

Wildland fire in ecosystems: effects of fire on soils and water

Nitrogen leaching from a forest soil exposed to fire retardant with and without fire: A laboratory study

Short- and medium-term effects of three fire fighting chemicals on the properties of a burnt soil

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About