Sage Journals: Discover world-class research

Abstract

Prescribed burning, the intentional application of fire to landscapes, is a crucial tool for land management. It aids in forest rejuvenation and controls nuisance species. This study explores the perceptions of 19 rural leaders in the Ozark Mountains regarding private landowners’ access to information and their involvement in decision-making about prescribed fires in the region. A qualitative descriptive approach was used. Interviews with rural leaders highlighted 3 main themes: structured efforts for community-based land management, capacity building partnerships, and smoke management safety. Our study’s findings underscore the transformative potential of prescribed burn associations’ structured efforts for community-based land management in bridging gaps between policy, and practice. Our study also reveals how collaborative networks enhance resource-sharing, and decision-making autonomy, thereby expanding prescribed burn access for Missouri’s private landowners. Finally, persistent challenges, such as smoke management resource gaps, highlight the need for targeted investments in education and technology. While this research focuses on Mark Twain National Forest in south-central Missouri, its implications extend to other regions of the United States struggling with fragmented landownership and climate-driven wildfire risks, offering insights for scalable prescribed burn strategies.

Keywords

prescribed burns smoke health qualitative

Introduction

Globally, prescribed burning is a vital land management tool for achieving diverse ecological objectives. This intentional application of fire to landscapes is a crucial tool for land management, aiding in forest rejuvenation and controlling nuisance species.¹ By reducing above-ground fuel loads, such as excess tree cover, prescribed burns play a crucial role in constraining the size and intensity of wildfires.^2,3

In addition to fire control, prescribed burns play a vital role in conservation by restoring native trees, enhancing plant diversity, and improving soil health and wildlife habitats.¹ However, several barriers hinder the widespread adoption of prescribed burning. These obstacles include the costs involved, legal responsibilities due to the possibility of fires escaping control, limited experience and resources among landowners, and the perception of high risk associated with prescribed burns.^4,5

Moreover, concerns about air quality arise because burn windows are associated with higher levels of PM2.5 air pollution, which can worsen respiratory issues like asthma.^6
-8 For example, California plans to increase prescribed burn use to mitigate the growing wildfire risk, with researchers predicting a 15-fold increase in the number of people exposed to prescribed burn smoke annually compared to historical levels.⁹ The expected increase in the frequency of exposure days will likely contribute to a greater overall health burden, particularly in forested regions of California. In this study, researchers underscore the importance of considering both exposure levels and frequency when developing public health strategies for prescribed burn smoke, assisting forest management agencies in protecting communities while addressing wildfire risks.⁹

Cultural perspectives may also significantly influence how communities perceive and respond to the health risks associated with prescribed burns.^10,11 For many indigenous and rural communities, prescribed burning is integral to traditional land management practices, valued not only for ecological benefits but also as cultural heritage.¹¹ Conversely, in urban settings, the cultural legacy of Smokey Bear has significantly shaped American attitudes toward smoke from wood fires.¹² While effective in raising awareness about fire prevention, the campaign has been criticized for oversimplifying fire’s ecological role.¹²

Numerous researchers have examined the factors that either facilitate or hinder prescribed burning on public lands across the United States.^13
-17 In addition to efforts led by government agencies, prescribed burns are also conducted by cooperative groups such as Prescribed Burn Associations (PBAs) and hunting clubs. This is especially true in the Midwestern and Southeastern United States (U.S.), where private land ownership is more common than in the western U.S.

PBAs are collectives of landowners pooling knowledge and resources together, promoting safe burn practices and reducing many of the barriers individual land managers otherwise face.^18,19 Kreuter et al²⁰ emphasizes PBAs are vital for overcoming barriers like liability concerns, knowledge gaps, and fragmented landownership through collective action, trust-building, and shared resources.²⁰ They also highlight the need to expand PBA networks, integrate Indigenous ecological knowledge, and strengthen policy support to enhance equity and scalability.²⁰

Despite the growing recognition of the ability of PBAs to address challenges through collective action,^18,20 current research reveals geographical and methodological limitations. There are significant gaps in qualitative analyses regarding landowner perceptions of prescribed burns, the dynamics of community networks, and the implementation of safety protocols, especially in underserved rural areas, especially in regions like Missouri.

Mark Twain National Forest and the surrounding areas in the Ozark Mountains of south-central Missouri depend on fire for ecological health.²¹ According to the Nature Conservancy, Missouri²² currently has over 10 established Prescribed Burn Associations, with an additional 5 to 7 in development. These associations play a crucial role in land management in a state where over 93% of the land is privately owned.²²

However, residents face highly fragmented private land ownership that complicates prescribed burning. Missouri’s smaller landowners often lack institutional support that addresses their specific challenges.²³ These circumstances increase the risks of biodiversity loss and catastrophic wildfires, especially as drought conditions become more severe.

The purpose of our study is to explore rural leaders’ perceptions of private landowners’ access to information and their involvement in decision-making processes concerning prescribed burn use in the rural Ozark Mountains of south-central Missouri. Understanding these perceptions is essential for leveraging the conservation benefits of prescribed burning in Missouri. Our article examines 3 themes from a broader qualitative descriptive study on prescribed burns.

Methods

Design

A qualitative descriptive study was conducted to understand how leaders perceive private landowners’ access to information and their involvement in decision-making processes concerning prescribed burns in south-central Missouri, an area where little is known. This research design offers straightforward descriptions and insights into the phenomenon, addressing issues within their context.²⁴ It is a flexible approach, not bound by theoretical frameworks, which makes it particularly useful for exploring the perceptions of rural leaders in the Ozark Mountains regarding the most significant impacts of prescribed burn smoke on private landowners.^24,25 This method is ideal for providing practical and easily applicable findings for practitioners and policymakers.²⁶ The study was developed in accordance with the Consolidated Criteria for Reporting Qualitative Research (COREQ).²⁷ See Supplemental Appendix 1.

Participants

Our research was conducted in and around the Mark Twain National Forest in the Ozark Mountains of south-central Missouri. The objective was to recruit rural leaders through purposive and snowball sampling. In this context, “leaders” are defined as individuals possessing substantial expertise, exclusive access to information, and roles in developing or implementing community programs and policies related to prescribed burns. This included individuals involved in informing, prioritizing, developing, or implementing programs, policies, or decision-making related to prescribed burns in the Ozarks.

Purposive sampling allowed us to select participants with specific characteristics, such as their professional environment and educational background, aligning with our qualitative research aim to achieve a deep understanding of the subject matter.²⁸ Snowball sampling was instrumental in identifying additional participants, ensuring a comprehensive range of insights.²⁸

The sample size was established by reaching data saturation, at which point no new information emerged from further data collection, and all participants’ responses were included.²⁹

Initially, participants were identified through recommendations from the University Extension Council and targeted online searches for leaders in relevant agencies and organizations. Staff were asked to forward an email to leaders in rural areas involved in prescribed burns. Initially, study participants were recruited using an email invitation, which provided a brief introduction of the research project and the role of the study participant. Study participants were then asked to forward the email along to others who met the study criteria. We aimed to include individuals with diverse perspectives on rural Missouri, encompassing professionals from state and federal agencies, nongovernmental organizations, private landowners who are currently leaders in PBAs, and even news media who partnered with forestry services to write stories for rural newspapers about prescribed burns. Invitations for semi-structured interviews were sent via email to potential participants. Eligibility criteria included membership in relevant health or environmental agencies, institutes, or organizations responding to Ozarks’ smoke events.

Clear exclusion criteria were established for the study. Individuals under 18 years of age, non-English speakers, or those who do not self-identify as leaders were excluded. Furthermore, those not responsible for informing, prioritizing, developing, or implementing programs, policies, or decisions regarding prescribed burns in the Ozarks were also excluded from participation.

Data Collection

The data collection process involved 19 semi-structured interviews conducted by the primary investigator, a nurse with specialized training in qualitative interviewing techniques. After receiving approval from the Institutional Review Board (IRB), the principal investigator contacted participants who met the inclusion criteria. The interviews were held privately in person or via Microsoft Teams and followed a semi-structured interview guide. This interview guide, developed by the primary investigator, included questions about health implications, communication strategies, and the effectiveness of programs and policies concerning prescribed burn smoke.

The interviews were conducted in a confidential setting, ensuring that only the participant and researcher were present. This arrangement enabled the interviewer to engage in the sessions without any disruptions. The interviews began with broad questions about everyday life, such as “Tell me about your experiences with prescribed burns.” They progressed to more focused questions about key concepts and policies related to prescribed burns. The concluding question was, “Is there anything else you want to add?” See Table 1.

Table 1.

Interview Questions.

Category	Question
Background information	What is your role in your organization, and how did you come to work in that position?
Background information	How long have you been working in this sector?
Project questions	Does your work focus on prescribed fire smoke?
	What does exposure to prescribed fires mean to you? (in the context of rural Missourians/landscapes)
	Does your work involve prescribed fire smoke?
	What makes a community/region particularly vulnerable to prescribed fire smoke?
	Are there any groups of people that are particularly vulnerable to prescribed fire smoke in rural areas? Why or why not?
Threats	What are the major threats to rural Missourians from prescribed fire smoke?
	Do you see these threats changing in 5 years? 25 years?
	What planning cycles do you operate on/how far out in time are you planning prescribed fire smoke?
Community response	On a smoky day, how do people in this community respond? What actions do they take to protect themselves and their families from the health impacts of smoke?
Community response	What are the measures that people take to alleviate prescribed fire smoke symptoms?
Programs and policies	What are some examples of programs/policies/or educational materials that might aid with prescribed fire smoke impacts on rural communities?
	From your perspective, which programs/policies regarding prescribed fire smoke are effective? Why?
	Are there gaps that could be filled?
	What are the barriers to make these changes?
	Who is responsible for funding/organizing/implementing programs/policies/or educational materials that might aid with prescribed fire smoke impacts?
Communication	What is the most effective way to communicate air quality notification and prescribed fire smoke warnings to the public?
	What time is most effective to reach out to the public?
	What is the most effective message content to influence human response to prescribed fire smoke?
	What channels for communication do people seem to trust the most and why?
	What channels do they trust the least and why?

A pilot study tested the interview guide with participants, confirming the questions’ adequacy without necessitating any changes. Before each interview, participants were briefed about the study and asked to provide informed consent. Each session lasted approximately 60 minutes and was audio-recorded. The recordings were professionally transcribed verbatim and reviewed by the interviewer for accuracy. Following each interview, the interviewer documented field notes. The data collection process concluded when the researchers determined that data saturation had been achieved.

Data Analysis

Before analysis, the data were anonymized and transcribed. Guided by our research questions, we explored the most frequently occurring topics in the interviews based on methodologies outlined by Gale et al and Smith and Firth.^30,31 The data analysis followed Braun and Clarke’s thematic reflexive analysis framework and was conducted collaboratively by all 3 authors.^26,32 The interviews, once fully transcribed, were analyzed using Dedoose software.³³ Phase 1 involved reading the interview transcripts thoroughly to gain an overview and become familiar with the data. In Phase 2, we generated codes for semantic or latent content. During Phase 3, these codes were analyzed inductively to develop sub-themes. In Phase 4, we examined the emerging themes to ensure they were well-supported by the codes. Phase 5 involved detailing and defining all aspects of each theme. Finally, in Phase 6, the final report was drafted, encapsulating our findings.

Rigor

To ensure these standards in the study, 3 nurse researchers, each holding a doctoral degree and possessing expertise in qualitative research, engaged in thorough discussions about the data until they reached a consensus. This was achieved through collaborative coding sessions, where interpretations were rigorously examined and debated to confirm their validity and reliability.^34,35 These measures contributed to a comprehensive analysis, ensuring the study’s findings were both credible and accurate.

Results

Our study investigates the perceptions of rural leaders in the Ozark Mountains about private landowners’ access to information and involvement in decision-making concerning prescribed fires. It includes 19 leaders, mainly men, from diverse backgrounds—government agencies, private foundations, private landowners, and news media (Table 2). Three themes emerged: structured efforts for community-based land management, capacity-building partnerships, and smoke management safety (see Table 3). All participants discussed the benefits of PBAs.

Table 2.

Participant Characteristics.

ID	Affiliation	Gender
Participant-1	Government/Public Agency	Male
Participant-2	Private Foundation	Male
Participant-3	Government/Public Agency	Male
Participant-4	Private Foundation	Male
Participant-5	Private Landowner Community Leader	Male
Participant-6	Government/Public Agency	Male
Participant-7	Private Landowner Community Leader	Male
Participant-8	Government/Public Agency	Male
Participant-9	Government/Public Agency	Male
Participant-10	Government/Public Agency	Male
Participant-11	Private landowner Community Leader	Female
Participant-12	Government/Public Agency	Female
Participant-13	New Media	Female
Participant-14	Government/Public Agency	Male
Participant-15	Government/Public Agency	Male
Participant-16	Government/Public Agency	Female
Participant- 17	Government/Public Agency	Male
Participant-18	Private Landowner Community Leader	Male
Participant-19	Government/Public Agency	Male

Table 3.

Themes and Exemplar Quotes.

Theme	Definition of theme	Exemplar quotes
Structured efforts for community-based land management	This theme reveals community-driven initiatives that create formal systems and protocols (like burn plans and committees) for efficient, safe, and ecologically sound prescribed burning, balancing regulatory compliance with effective land stewardship.	“We form these PBAs, prescribed burn associations. The one I started as chair of the council; we had five in the state. Five, maybe six in the state. We now have 13 with two more on the way.”
		“We have a committee that approves your burn plan. We require that you have a burn plan. Then you get put in a waiting line.”
		“We do have policies, regulations, and guidelines that when writing a burn plan, we need to have a good understanding. From that policy standpoint, yes. We also have different factors we must go into when we write a burn plan. What are the objectives of the burn plan? What is the mapping area? What’s the output of having that fire? There are also things that we have to protect other resources whenever we’re trying to implement prescribed burns.”
Capacity-building partnerships	This theme emphasizes collaborative networks within PBAs that promote knowledge transfer and mentorship, addressing barriers to enhance the safety and efficiency of prescribed burn practices.	“There’s folks within those associations that have more experience—- that can mentor and coach those folks that have never burned before. How to prep, when to burn, when not to burn—take care of those things.”
		“We’ve always done prescribed burn by ourselves. Except now, we’ve recently started a local prescribed burn association. For years, the issue was always getting the manpower there on the day of the burn. This makes things so much easier.”
		“Each of PBAs has 10 to 150 members, and they’re presumably—a lot of them are landowners, and the reason they joined is because they wanted to have prescribed burns, but they were afraid to because they’re afraid of being sued.”
Smoke management safety	This theme emphasizes how PBAs utilize weather analysis and burn planning to reduce health risks and environmental impacts while also highlighting the need for improved PPE and educational resources for smoke exposure mitigation.	“Smoke management is a crucial component of the burn planning, ensuring that the burn achieves its objectives while maintaining safety and compliance with regulations.”
		“So it is—when we are writing those burn plans, understanding the impacts of the weather that we would be putting that fire on the ground, understanding which way the wind is blowing, understanding which way the transport winds are blowing even up higher, what that smoke is gonna do.”
		“But I think another thing is there’s not much good equipment [PPE] out there to mitigate smoke.”

Theme 1: Structured Efforts for Community-Based Land Management

This first theme reveals community-driven initiatives that create formal systems and protocols (like burn plans and committees) for efficient, safe, and ecologically sound prescribed burning, balancing regulatory compliance with effective land stewardship. Participants discussed the benefits of PBAs’ structured efforts for community-based land management. Ten participants explained that the emergence and rapid growth of PBAs in Missouri demonstrate a structured collective effort to manage land through prescribed burns, reflecting a growing trend in community-based land management practices. Participant 7 illustrated this development: “We form these PBAs, prescribed burn associations. The one I started as chair of the council; we had five in the state. Five, maybe six in the state. We now have 16 with a few more on the way.” This participant emphasized the rapid establishment of new associations, indicating a significant rise in community interest and involvement in land management practices.

Nine participants described the formal structures and processes established by PBAs to support activities like prescribed burns, focusing on how organized systems and protocols facilitate the efficient execution of prescribed burn tasks. Participant 18 noted, “We have a committee that approves your burn plan. We require that you have a burn plan. Then you get put in a waiting line.” This quote illustrates how organizational structures, like committees, play a critical role in managing prescribed burns and executing them according to standards, contributing to the overall success of prescribed burns.

Eight participants discussed the process of developing prescribed burn plans within PBAs’ structures. These plans involve a detailed and regulated approach to planning prescribed fires. Participants highlighted the importance of understanding and following PBAs’ policies and regulations, including considering specific objectives, mapping areas, anticipating outcomes, and ensuring resource protection. Participant 16 explained, “We do have policies, regulations, and guidelines that when writing a burn plan, we need to have a good understanding. From that policy standpoint, yes. We also have different factors we must go into when we write a burn plan. What are the objectives of the burn plan? What is the mapping area? What’s the output of having that fire? There are also things that we have to protect other resources whenever we’re trying to implement prescribed burns.” This quote highlights the complexity and multifaceted nature of developing a burn plan within a PBA, illustrating how private landowners balance compliance with regulations while addressing practical considerations.

Theme 2: Capacity-Building Partnerships

Our second theme emphasizes collaborative networks within PBAs that promote knowledge transfer and mentorship, addressing barriers to enhance the safety and efficiency of prescribed burn practices. Participants emphasize the benefits capacity-building partnerships through shared expertise and support within PBAs. Participants discuss the skills transfer from experienced practitioners to newcomers. Also, participants describe how partnerships within PBAs help overcome logistical, financial, and legal barriers by facilitating resource sharing and collaborative efforts.

Nine participants emphasized the importance of mentorship, training, and educational support for conducting prescribed burns. They emphasized transferring skills and knowledge from experienced individuals to newcomers, ensuring fire management practices are executed effectively. Participant 5 articulated this by stating, “There’s folks within those associations that have more experience—that can mentor and coach those folks that have never burned before. How to prep, when to burn, when not to burn—take care of those things.” This quote emphasizes the value of mentorship in passing down essential skills and knowledge, helping less experienced members learn how to handle complex tasks.

Seven participants highlighted the benefits of forming PBAs and working together to share resources, reduce costs, and improve fire management practices’ overall efficiency and safety. Participant 16 described this transformation: “We’ve always done prescribed burn by ourselves. Except now, we’ve recently started a local prescribed burn association. For years, the issue was always getting the manpower there on the day of the burn. This makes things so much easier.” The quote highlights how forming a local PBA has alleviated the logistical issue of securing enough personnel to execute prescribed burns effectively. By pooling resources and collaborating, the association improves efficiency and ensures that burns are conducted safely and reliably.

Finally, 6 participants revealed that motivations to join PBAs are driven by legal concerns, particularly regarding liability issues. Participant 13 explained, “Each of PBAs has 10 to 150 members, and they’re presumably—a lot of them are landowners, and the reason they joined is because they wanted to have prescribed burns, but they were afraid to because they’re afraid of being sued.” This explains why individuals join PBAs, suggesting that while many landowners are interested in conducting prescribed burns to manage their land, they are deterred by fears of legal repercussions.

Theme 3: Smoke Management Safety

Our third theme emphasizes how PBAs utilize weather analysis and burn planning to reduce health risks and environmental impacts while also highlighting the need for improved PPE and educational resources for smoke exposure mitigation. Participants highlighted the ways PBAs integrate smoke mitigation to ensure public safety and environmental compliance. Nine participants explained that a crucial aspect of prescribed burns is smoke management, which requires an understanding of weather patterns and smoke dispersal to minimize health impacts and ensure public safety. Participant 16 highlighted the importance of understanding smoke dispersal to mitigate potential health effects. Effective smoke management is integral to burn planning, helping minimize negative environmental and public health impacts. Participant 4 noted, “Smoke management is a crucial component of the burn planning, ensuring that the burn achieves its objectives while maintaining safety and compliance with regulations.”

Eight participants discussed that creating a burn plan involves considering smoke dispersal. Participant 14 explained, “So it is—when we are writing those burn plans, understanding the impacts of the weather that we would be putting that fire on the ground, understanding which way the wind is blowing, understanding which way the transport winds are blowing even up higher, what that smoke is gonna do.” This quote illustrates that understanding weather patterns, such as wind direction and transport winds, is essential to predicting smoke behavior and minimizing community impact. Participants highlighted advancements in modeling and resources from organizations like the National Weather Service aid in planning, providing more accurate predictions and safer outcomes for prescribed burns.

Finally, 4 participants described the lack of adequate PPE and sufficient information to mitigate personal smoke effects, which points to the need for better resources and education regarding smoke management within PBAs. Participant 17 stated, “But I think another thing is there’s not much good equipment out there to mitigate smoke.” This participant so went on to highlight the inadequacy of current PPE to reduce smoke exposure effectively and the scarcity of educational resources on smoke mitigation. This implies a gap in public knowledge, suggesting a need for better PPE and information to address the health risks associated with smoke.

Discussion

Our study advances the body of literature on prescribed burns, in the rural areas of south-central Missouri, by examining rural leaders’ perceptions of prescribed burn implementation in a region where collaborative models, such as PBAs, are emerging as important yet under studied solutions. Building on Clark et al’s¹⁸ review, our research highlights how Missouri’s PBAs address localized challenges, including legal fears and logistical hurdles, through frameworks, mentorship, and smoke mitigation.¹⁸

Structured Efforts for Community-Based Land Management

Rural leaders underscored the critical role of PBAs in fostering community-driven land management through structured efforts which include formalized processes and collaborative planning. Previously researchers have focused on individual mentorship or regulatory compliance,³⁶ our study expands this understanding by demonstrating how PBAs’ formal structures support the expansion of community-based land management, a less emphasized perspective. Additionally, the rapid expansion of PBAs in Missouri, as reported by Participant 7 (from 5-6 to 13 active associations), signals a notable shift toward collaborative, localized solutions for wildfire prevention. Additionally, the speed of PBA expansion in Missouri highlights a broader community-driven trend in environmental management. While Rosen et al noted the role of peer networks in promoting prescribed fire, our results reveal how formalized associations accelerate adoption by systematizing knowledge exchange and operational support.¹¹ The rapid growth of PBAs in Missouri suggests that PBAs may serve as a replicable model for regions grappling with wildfire risks or habitat restoration needs. By bridging gaps between individual landowners and regulatory systems, PBAs exemplify the potential of community-driven initiatives to enhance ecological resilience. Their success underscores the value of integrating localized decision-making with institutional support, a strategy that could inform policy frameworks seeking to scale collaborative land management.

Capacity-Building Partnerships

Consistent with Bendel et al,³⁷ Taylor,¹⁹ and Toledo et al⁴ mentorship within PBAs emerged as a cornerstone for safe and effective fire management.^4,19,37 Participants emphasized that experienced practitioners not only transferred technical skills (eg, burn timing, preparation) but also instilled decision-making confidence in newcomers, reducing risks associated with inexperience. This aligns with prior work on knowledge transfer¹⁸ and advances the discourse by demonstrating how PBAs institutionalize mentorship through collective responsibility in rural communities. Unlike individual mentorship models, PBAs create an environment where knowledge dissemination becomes a shared organizational priority, ensuring continuity and scalability, a critical advantage in rural or resource-limited contexts.

The role of PBAs in mitigating logistical barriers represents a key contribution to understanding collaborative fire management. Participants highlighted dramatic improvements in securing manpower and equipment, similar to challenges less explicitly addressed in earlier studies.^4,5,18 For instance, Participant 16’s account of overcoming chronic manpower shortages through PBAs underscores how collective action transforms isolated efforts into sustainable practices. While prior research acknowledged resource-sharing benefits,¹⁸ our study reveals the disproportionate impact of PBAs in reducing both logistical complexity and financial burdens. This finding suggests that PBAs not only lower individual costs but also enabling broader adoption of prescribed burns.

Another finding was the prominence of legal concerns as a driver for PBA participation. Six participants, including landowners, cited liability fears as a primary motivator—a dimension explore in a systematic review by Clark et al.¹⁸ PBAs, by offering liability mitigation through shared responsibility and institutional support. Confirmation of this insight recontextualizes PBA membership as not merely a practical or educational endeavor but also a legal safeguard, broadening the understanding of ways to decrease barriers to prescribed fire adoption.

Finally, the interplay between mentorship, resource sharing, and legal protection within PBAs reveals unexpected synergies. While prior studies examined these factors in isolation, our findings demonstrate how PBAs integrate them into a cohesive framework. For example, mentorship not only builds technical capacity but also fosters trust and collaboration, reinforcing resource-sharing networks. Similarly, collective action reduces logistical barriers while simultaneously dispersing liability risks. This systemic approach amplifies benefits beyond the sum of individual components, offering a model for scaling prescribed fire efforts in diverse region

Smoke Management Safety

Our findings highlight the critical role of PBAs in integrating technical precision and community-centered strategies to address smoke management challenges, which is a cornerstone of public safety and environmental compliance. Participants emphasized rigorous burn planning grounded in weather pattern analysis and smoke dispersal modeling, aligning with Clark¹⁸ and Kreuter et al,⁵ who advocate for science-based strategies to minimize public health risks.^5,18 Our study builds on previous research by demonstrating how PBAs institutionalize these practices within communities.

An unexpected finding revealed a disconnect between advanced planning frameworks and the lack of practical resources. Although participants adhered to smoke management protocols, they reported insufficient personal protective equipment (PPE) and insufficient access to educational materials (Participant 17). This gap persists despite advancements in modeling tools, indicating that technological innovation alone cannot resolve the challenges faced on the ground. Toledo et al⁴ similarly noted resource limitations in rural fire management; however, our findings highlight a paradox: while prescribed burn associations (PBAs) excel in strategic planning, they struggle to provide members with the necessary PPE and knowledge to mitigate direct smoke exposure.

Furthermore, unlike structural and wildland firefighters, whose carcinogenic and physiological risks have been studied, the exposure and toxicity of pollutants from prescribed burn smoke affecting private landowners in PBAs remain largely unexplored.^38-40 Researchers have established a strong link between wildfire smoke exposure and serious health issues, prompting researchers to advocate for protective measures, such as masks for firefighters.^38-40 However, other researchers have raised concerns that masks may cause overheating during strenuous activities, and have opted instead to relocate crews to cleaner air when feasible.⁴¹

While some international practices suggest that masks do not significantly increase the risk of heatstroke, according to researchers, many firefighters resist their use due to comfort concerns.⁴¹ This situation underscores the urgent need to combine technical planning with targeted investments in culturally appropriate PPE development for private landowners in PBAs and community education. PBAs, with their collaborative networks, could effectively serve as distribution hubs for resources and training.

The coexistence of sophisticated planning and resource gaps represents a critical tension. While PBAs excel in strategic coordination, their reliance on external tools (eg, federal weather data) and lack of internal smoke-mitigation resources reveal systemic dependencies. These finding challenges assumptions that community-based models inherently resolve resource limitations¹⁸ and adds a nuance perspective to Toledo et al’s⁴ work by highlighting how even collaborative structures require external support to address technological and educational deficits.⁴

Future Research

Based on the results of our study, several key areas for future research have been identified across the themes. First, future researchers should prioritize expanding beyond qualitative approaches to incorporate robust quantitative and mixed methods designs. For instance, investigations into mentorship and collaboration within PBAs would benefit from longitudinal studies that quantify skill transfer rates, safety outcomes, and empowerment metrics using standardized scales or observational frameworks. Statistical analyses could identify causal relationships between mentorship structures (eg, duration, frequency) and practitioner performance, enabling evidence-based refinements to training programs.

Additionally, research on smoke behavior prediction and health impacts should integrate quantitative data from sensor networks, air quality monitoring systems, and predictive modeling to validate qualitative insights. Advanced computational methods, such as machine learning, could enhance the precision of smoke dispersion models, while randomized controlled trials might evaluate the efficacy of new smoke management technologies or educational interventions. Furthermore, longitudinal assessments of private landowner receptiveness to fire management messaging could employ large-scale surveys or experimental designs to isolate factors driving engagement and behavior change.

Implications

The implications of our study highlight several critical areas for advancing land management practices through prescribed burns. First, leaders need to emphasize the importance of balancing regulatory compliance with practical land management objectives. This balance is crucial not only for effective land management but also for encouraging broader participation among landowners. Formal structures, such as committees and associations, are pivotal in facilitating safe and effective prescribed burns. These structures help prioritize tasks and manage resources efficiently, making it essential for policymakers and community leaders to increase support for these frameworks.

Developing robust mentorship schemes and comprehensive training programs can also empower landowners and practitioners, reducing risks and enhancing their competence. Furthermore, the economic benefits PBAs provide, such as cost-sharing and logistical support, point to the need for policies that promote and fund these collaborative efforts. By lowering barriers to implementation, these policies can encourage broader adoption of prescribed burns as an effective land management practice.

Finally, prescribed burn smoke awareness and safety procedures highlight the need for improved resources and education to address health and environmental concerns. Effective smoke management is a significant component of burn planning, requiring understanding weather patterns and smoke dispersal to minimize health impacts and ensure public safety. Enhancing public awareness and providing PPE for smoke mitigation are essential to reducing the negative impacts of prescribed burns. By improving the dissemination of information and acceptance of prescribed fire practices, stakeholders can foster greater community engagement and support.

Limitations

Our study offers valuable insights into prescribed burn practices, but several limitations could impact the generalizability and applicability of our findings. First, the geographic focus on PBAs in Missouri may limit the applicability of these findings to other regions with different environmental, regulatory, and cultural contexts. Diverse geographic areas may have varying regulations, ecological conditions, and community dynamics that influence land management practices differently, potentially affecting the outcomes of similar initiatives elsewhere.

Resource availability also emerged as a concern, as the role of associations and institutional support is pivotal for providing resources and expertise for prescribed burns. However, the availability and quality of these resources might be inconsistent across different regions, impacting the ability of individual landowners and smaller organizations to conduct safe and effective burns. Variability in access to mentorship, training, and financial support could affect the success of prescribed fire initiatives, pointing to a need for more equitable resource distribution. Addressing these limitations through broader geographic contexts, gender dynamics, regulatory challenges, and resource variability in future research could provide a more comprehensive understanding of community-based land management practices.

Finally, our study’s qualitative focus highlights a need for quantitative research to statistically validate connections between PBA support, prescribed burn outcomes, and ecological impacts, strengthening evidence for this community-driven models’ efficacy. Additionally, its cross-sectional design limits insights into temporal dynamics, requiring longitudinal studies to track evolving practices, policy compliance, and long-term ecological effects across multiple burn seasons. Together, these approaches could deepen understanding of sustainability challenges and inform resilience-building strategies in fire-prone landscapes.

Conclusion

Prescribed burning is an essential tool for ecological management, offering critical benefits in wildfire mitigation, biodiversity conservation, and ecosystem restoration.^1,3 However, persistent barriers, including liability risks, resource limitations, and air quality concerns, have historically constrained adoption of prescribed burning, particularly among private landowners in fragmented landscapes like south-central Missouri’s Ozark Mountains.^4,5,23 Our study’s findings underscore the transformative potential of PBAs’ structured efforts for community-based land management in bridging gaps between policy, and practice. Our study also reveals how collaborative networks enhance resource-sharing, and decision-making autonomy, thereby expanding prescribed burn access for Missouri’s private landowners, a demographic overlooked in prior research in Missouri.²³ Notably, the rapid growth of PBAs signals a paradigm shift toward decentralized, community-led conservation, aligning with Kreuter et al’s⁵ call for integrating Indigenous knowledge and scaling policy support.⁵ However, persistent challenges, such as smoke management resource gaps, highlight the need for targeted investments in education and technology. While our research focuses on Mark Twain National Forest in south-central Missouri, its implications extend to other regions of the U.S. struggling with fragmented landownership and climate-driven wildfire risks, offering insights for scalable prescribed burn strategies. Future studies should explore longitudinal impacts of PBAs and cross-regional comparisons to further refine collaborative fire management frameworks.

Supplemental Material

sj-docx-1-ehi-10.1177_11786302251401301 – Supplemental material for Rural Leaders’ Perspectives on Prescribed Burns: A Qualitative Study

Supplemental material, sj-docx-1-ehi-10.1177_11786302251401301 for Rural Leaders’ Perspectives on Prescribed Burns: A Qualitative Study by Sarah Oerther, Renée L. Davis and Chuntana Reangsing in Environmental Health Insights

Footnotes

Ethical Considerations

Ethical approval was granted by a Washington University’s Institutional Review Board IRB #: 202404053.

Consent to Participate

Informed consent to participate was written.

Author Contributions

Dr. Oerther contributed to selecting the design of this manuscript,data acquisition,interpretation of data,drafting the article and final approval for submission. Dr. Davis contributed to the design of this manuscript,data analysis,interpretation of data,drafting the article,and final approval for submission. Dr. Reangsing contributed to the design of this manuscript,data analysis,interpretation of data,drafting the article,and final approval for submission.

Funding

The authors disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article: Supported by the National Institute of Environmental Health Sciences of the National Institutes of Health under Award Number 1P2CES033430-01. PI: Linda McCauley,Support by The Barnes-Jewish Foundation.

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The authors declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research,authorship,and/or publication of this article.

Data Availability Statement

The qualitative data supporting the findings of this study are not publicly available due to the sensitive nature of the participant information and the need to protect their privacy. However,de-identified excerpts from interview transcripts may be available upon reasonable request from the corresponding author,with prior approval from the institutional ethics review board.

Supplemental Material

Supplemental material for this article is available online.

References

Baldwin

Davidson

Coleman

. Global Application of Prescribed Fire ( Weir

Scasta

, eds) CSIRO Publishing; 2022.

Rau

Tausch

Reiner

, et al. Influence of prescribed fire on ecosystem biomass, carbon, and nitrogen in a pinyon juniper woodland. Rangeland Ecol Manag. 2010;63(2):197-202.

Fernandes

. Empirical support for the use of prescribed burning as a fuel treatment. Curr For Rep. 2015;1(2):118-127.

Toledo

Kreuter

Sorice

Taylor

. To Burn or not to burn: ecological restoration, liability concerns, and the role of prescribed burning associations. Rangelands. 2012;34(2):18-23.

Kreuter

Woodard

Taylor

Richard Teague

. Perceptions of Texas landowners regarding fire and its use. Rangeland Ecol Manag. 2008;61(4):456-464.

Baker

Koplitz

Foley

Avey

Hawkins

. Characterizing grassland fire activity in the Flint Hills region and air quality using satellite and routine surface monitor data. Sci Total Environ. 2019;659:1555-1566.

Haikerwal

Reisen

Sim

, et al. Impact of smoke from prescribed burning: is it a public health concern? J Air Waste Manag Assoc. 2015;65(5):592-598.

Huang

Russell

Mulholland

Odman

. The impacts of prescribed fire on PM2.5 air quality and human health: application to asthma-related emergency room visits in georgia, USA. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2019;16(13):2312.

Rosenberg

Hoshiko

Buckman

, et al. Health impacts of future prescribed fire smoke: considerations from an exposure scenario in California. Earth’s Future. 2024;12(2):e2023EF003778.

10.

Nanavati

Grimm

. Humans, fire, and ecology in the southern Missouri Ozarks, USA. Holocene. 2020;30(1):125-135.

11.

Rosen

Henery

Slater

, et al. A culture of fire: identifying community risk perceptions surrounding prescribed burning in the Flint Hills, Kansas. J Appl Commun. 2023;106(4):1-23. doi:10.4148/1051-0834.2455

12.

Donovan

Brown

. Be careful what you wish for: the legacy of smokey bear. Front Ecol Environ. 2007;5(2):73-79.

13.

Miller

Field

Mach

. Barriers and enablers for prescribed burns for wildfire management in California. Nat Sustain. 2020;3(2):101-109.

14.

Ascher

Wilson

Toman

. The importance of affect, perceived risk and perceived benefit in understanding support for fuels management among wildland–urban interface residents. Int J Wildland Fire. 2013;22(3):267-276.

15.

Laband

Hussain

González-Cabán

. The impact of forest service litigation success on administrative appeals of proposed fuels reduction actions. For Policy Econ. 2008;10(7-8):444-449.

16.

Quinn-Davidson

Varner

. Impediments to prescribed fire across agency, landscape and manager: an example from northern California. Int J Wildland Fire. 2012;21(3):210-218.

17.

Schultz

McCaffrey

Huber-Stearns

. Policy barriers and opportunities for prescribed fire application in the western United States. Int J Wildland Fire. 2019;28(11):874-884.

18.

Clark

McGranahan

Geaumont

Wonkka

Ott

Kreuter

. Barriers to prescribed fire in the US Great Plains, Part I: systematic review of socio-ecological research. Land. 2022;11(9):1521.

19.

Taylor

. Prescribed burning cooperatives: empowering and equipping ranchers to manage Rangelands. Rangelands. 2005;27(1):18-23.

20.

Kreuter

Stroman

Wonkka

Weir

Abney

Hoffman

. Landowner perceptions of legal liability for using prescribed fire in the Southern Plains, United States. Rangeland Ecol Manag. 2019;72(6):959-967.

21.

Guyette

. An Ozark fire history. 1999. https://mdc.mo.gov/magazines/conservationist/1999-03/ozark-fire-history

22.

The Nature Conservancy. Restoring Missouri’s Landscapes with Fire. The Nature Conser; 2025. Accessed October 27, 2025. https://www.nature.org/en-us/about-us/where-we-work/united-states/missouri/stories-in-missouri/missouri-fire/#:~:text=%E2%80%9CCurrently%2C%20we%20have%2016%20established%20Prescribed%20Burn,of%20development%2C%20which%20is%20exciting%20to%20see.%E2%80%9D

23.

Missouri Department of Conservation. Prescribed fire. 2025. https://mdc.mo.gov/your-property/fire-management/prescribed-fire.

24.

Doyle

McCabe

Keogh

Brady

McCann

. An overview of the qualitative descriptive design within nursing research. J Res Nurs. 2020;25(5):443-455.

25.

Kim

Sefcik

Bradway

. Characteristics of qualitative descriptive studies: a systematic review. Res Nurs Health. 2017;40(1):23-42.

26.

Clark

. Thematic Analysis a Practical Guide. Sage; 2021.

27.

Tong

Sainsbury

Craig

. Consolidated criteria for reporting qualitative research (COREQ): a 32-item checklist for interviews and focus groups. Int J Qual Health Care. 2007;19(6):349-357.

28.

Creswell

. 30 Essential Skills for the Qualitative Researcher. Sage; 2016.

29.

Fusch

Ness

. Are we there yet? Data saturation in qualitative research. Qual Rep. Published online September 8, 2015. doi:10.46743/2160-3715/2015.2281

30.

Gale

Heath

Cameron

Rashid

Redwood

. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13(1):117.

31.

Smith

Firth

. Qualitative data analysis: the framework approach. Nurse Res. 2011;18(2):52-62.

32.

Braun

Clarke

. What can “thematic analysis” offer health and wellbeing researchers? Int J Qual Stud Health Well-being. 2014;9(1):26152.

33.

Cousins

Hoang

Yilma

, et al. Using dedoose to “quantitize” qualitative data in mixed method analysis: a case analysis. Can J Program Eval. 2024;39(1):83-96.

34.

Carminati

. Generalizability in qualitative research: a tale of two traditions. Qual Health Res. 2018;28(13):2094-2101.

35.

Polit

Beck

, eds. Nursing Research: Generating and Assessing Evidence for Nursing Practice. 10th ed. Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2016.

36.

Jose

Agarwal

Zhuang

. A data-driven analysis and optimization of the impact of prescribed fire programs on wildfire risk in different regions of the USA. Nat Hazards. 2023;118(1):181-207.

37.

Bendel

Toledo

Hovick

McGranahan

. Using behavioral change models to understand private landowner perceptions of prescribed fire in North Dakota. Rangeland Ecol Manag. 2020;73(1):194-200.

38.

West

Brown

Noth

Domitrovich

Navarro DuBose

. A review of occupational exposures to carcinogens among wildland firefighters. J Occup Environ Hyg. 2024;21(10):741-764.

39.

Lee

Ahn

McClure

, et al. Cancer risk and mortality among firefighters: a meta-analytic review. Front Oncol. 2023;13:1130754.

40.

García-Heras

Gutiérrez-Arroyo

Rodríguez-Medina

, et al. Determinants of health and performance in wildland firefighters: a narrative review. J Funct Morphol Kinesiol. 2025;10(1):80.

41.

Ghiyasi

Nabizadeh

Jazari

, et al. The effect of personal protective equipment on thermal stress: an experimental study on firefighters. Work. 2020;67(1):141-147.

Supplementary Material

Please find the following supplemental material available below.

For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.

For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.

0.03 MB

0.00 MB