Federal wildland firefighters can now mask up, in long-standing policy reversal

The federal government will now allow its firefighters to mask up — upending a decades-long policy that had left them exposed to toxic flurries of illness-inducing wildfire smoke.

The U.S. Forest Service this week issued new guidance for wildland firefighters regarding the voluntary use of N95 respirators via the National Interagency Fire Center’s health program, as first reported by The New York Times.

The guidance promotes the “use of a properly-fitted N95 respirator on a clean-shaven face with a successful fit test,” explaining that doing so “will remove at least 95 percent of airborne particles,” including those in smoke. Firefighters must only use masks approved by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, per the instructions.

“N95 masks are available, should a firefighter choose to wear that,” Tom Schultz, Forest Service chief, confirmed at a Tuesday session of the House Subcommittee on Federal Lands. “They’re provided on fires.”

Schultz was responding to questions from Rep. Joe Neguse (D-Colo.), ranking member of the subcommittee, who along with other lawmakers had sent letters to the Forest Service demanding widespread improvements to firefighter work conditions — including, but not limited to, the provision of N95 masks.

Although wildfire smoke is known to contain dust particles and toxic chemicals linked to cancers and respiratory illnesses, federal policy had prevented the first responders from wearing anything but bandanas — arguing that masks could interfere with their work.

The new guidance still does not approve the use of masks in all circumstances, warning against their use in “arduous” situations on the fire-line, in the presence of oil mists or in low-oxygen environments.

Neguse’s office recognized this week’s decision as “a tremendous step” toward protecting a critical workforce from severe health issues, while acknowledging that there is more to be done to improve firefighter working conditions.

Other questions raised by Neguse and his colleagues in their letters have focused on staff shortages, inadequate food supplies, insufficient support regarding health risks and work outside the scope of duty, such as cleaning toilets or mowing lawns.

As for these additional questions, Schultz responded to Neguse on Tuesday that the Forest Service “will work toward answering those.”

“We take it very seriously, firefighter health,” Schultz said. “It’s not just physical health in terms of respiration, but also psychological health.”

“Firefighters’ safety is of critical importance to the agency,” he continued. “We’re working with our firefighters to make sure that they are protected.”