Red cloud: Environmental experts fear for fish as wildfires drive more fire retardant drops

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3960562-201707181651.htmlWith more than 700 wildfires burning through British Columbia's forests since this spring, environmental experts fear the risinguse of chemical fire retardants may putwild fish at risk.

The red plumes of the ammonia compound are a criticaltool in aerial fire fighting, and it's expected to be needed more in coming decades ifclimate change causes morewildfires,according to B.C.'s Wildfire Management Branch.

The B.C. Wildfire Service says air tankers have already dropped eight million litres of retardant. That's a lot, considering the yearly average in the province is 9.4 million litres over the course of the entire wildfire season.

And B.C. pilots saysometimes it'saccidentally dropped into streams and lakes.

While the fire retardant used in Canada is deemed safe for humans and animals even if it's accidentally ingested there is one exception outlined inproduct literature.

Ammonia compounds, which are aningredient in fire retardant used in Canada, can killaquatic life if they'renot diluted or if it they aren'tflushed out by moving water.

"The worst scenario would be a small static pond and a direct hit with an aircraft drop," says a product information sheet.

This concerns environmental advocates who say the fire retardant, which containsliquid fertilizer, can be toxic to fish in water.

"Even with dilution in a river or a stream itcan reach acutely toxic levels." said environmental engineer Joseph Dietrich of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) in Oregon.

A 2014 NOAA study exposed fish to fire retardant chemicals for 96 hours. The study showed the chemicals can weaken or kill fish. They are especially toxic to smolting Chinook fry, which can die when they later enter sea water.

While anexposure this long is unlikely in running water, the risk of retardanthitting still water or getting stuck in an eddyincreases the more it's used, Dietrichsaid.

However, it's not clear if the U.S. studies are comparable to the exposures and concentrations of the chemicals used in B .C.

While the U.S. Forest Service is studying the effects of wash-off into creeks and watersheds, it is clear current products are safer than in the past. Decades ago, formulations includedcyanide, but that was stopped.

Aerial tankers deliver fire retardant

7 years ago

Duration 0:25

B.C. Wildfire crews drop red fire retardant close to homes burning in Lake Country, B.C.

Aiming for forest and grass

In Canada, most fire retardant that's dropped from the air is one of the various formulations branded as Phos-Chek, and overall it's deemed safe.

Once mixed,Phos-Chek LC95A contains about 85 per cent water and 15 per cent liquid fertilizer, which is made up of ammonia compounds, plussmall amounts of clay, food-grade thickenerand iron oxide for a bright red colour.

The redhue helps pilots aim strategic lines of chemical fireguard to slowfires and buy ground crews time. The thickener makes the retardantsplat instead of blowing away.

In. B.C., most retardantlands on forestbecause it's most effective on fresh vegetationsuch as grass or trees. And pilots are careful to follow provincialguidelines, which follow U.S. standardsto keep retardant at least 100 metres from any waterway.

But sometimes, they have no choice.

If wind or error causes the pilot to drop sprays beyond the target's perimeter or hit non-targeted bodies of water or houses, the incidentsare reported.

'Better red than black'

Despitethe concern expressed by Dietrich,many agree that fire retardants are crucial in B.C. where wildfires are a growing concern.

As for the splatter people find on their homes and cars, once dry, it's tough to remove, leaving a faded red stain. But in the face of fire many feel the risk is worth it.

Fred and SylviaGerwienreturned to their Cache Creek, B.C., home after a wildfire evacuation to find windows and walls paintedred with fire retardant, but expressed relief their house was not charred or worse.

"Better red than black," said Gerwien, a long-time fire-zone resident.

Don MacKay, environmental health and safety manager for ICL Performance Products, the company thatmakes Phos-Chek, says it is safe, biodegradable and can be removed with soap and water.

When told of the NOAA studies that showed that retardant ingredients may harm fish, MacKay replied that the product is low risk.

"There is virtually almost no risk. It's very, very low risk," he said

He said theU.S. Department of Agriculture has tested the retardant on wildlife, aquatic life, vegetation, people and pets. He said the material is "just water-soluble fertilizer."

In B.C. the scarlet plume is likely to remain a critical tool for fighting wildfires for the foreseeable future.

Michael Benson, superintendent of provincial air tanker operations said the retardant is widely used because it is efficient at halting wildfires.

Benson is aware thatstudies have shown that the material can be toxic to fish, and said it must be deployed judiciously.

He predicts there will be a market in the future for more environmentally-friendly retardants so it's no longer a choice between slowing a fire and potentially harming fish.