Background: In Western Australia, the issue of bushfires (wildfires) poses a persistent health risk to both volunteer and career forestry firefighters, populations that have been historically understudied. Aims: This descriptive qualitative study aimed to examine firefighters’ level of understanding concerning hazardous exposures, their Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) protocols and their decontamination practices. Methods: Guided by the socioecological model, 23 semi-structured interviews were conducted with firefighters representing both volunteer and forestry sectors. Key results: Results indicate a gap in knowledge regarding the health risks associated with bushfire-generated smoke and contaminants among volunteer firefighters. Forestry firefighters, conversely, showed a greater awareness of these risks. Social dynamics, such as peer pressure, were identified as historical deterrents to PPE use, although recent trends indicate positive change. Forestry firefighters also highlighted systemic shortcomings, including inadequate provision of respiratory protection and lack of decontamination facilities for cleaning themselves and their PPE. Conclusion: This study underscores the critical need for educational initiatives to address these gaps in understanding, along with organisational reforms to promote a culture encouraging PPE use and to provide essential resources for effective decontamination. Implications: This research emphasises that a multi-level approach is essential for safeguarding the health of firefighters in bushfire-prone environments.

This study evaluates bushfire smoke as a workplace hazard for firefighters by characterising its chemical composition and potential health risks in Western Australia. Portable Fourier Transform Infrared (FTIR) spectrometry was used to measure airborne chemical concentrations at prescribed burns across five regions, including peat (acid sulphate) fire events. Samples were collected during both flaming and smouldering phases, as well as in perceived “clear” air resting zones. Results indicated that carbon monoxide (CO) was the dominant gas, reaching concentrations of 205 ppm at the fire front, followed by nitrogen monoxide (26 ppm) and methane (19 ppm). Peat fires produced distinct profiles, with ammonia (21.5 ppm) and sulphur dioxide (9.5 ppm) concentrations higher than those observed in typical bushfires. Smouldering phases emitted higher chemical concentrations than flaming phases 75% of the time. Even clear air zones contained measurable chemicals, with CO levels averaging 18 ppm, suggesting that firefighters are not free from exposure during rest periods. These findings highlight the need for fit-for-purpose respiratory protective equipment (RPE) and improved rest protocols to minimise exposure. The study underscores the importance of comprehensive health monitoring programs for firefighters to mitigate long-term health risks.

Evidence has previously shown that outer tunics (turnout coats) worn by firefighters at structural fires are contaminated with harmful chemicals which subsequently off-gas from the material. However, there is limited research on whether this phenomenon extends to wildland firefighter uniforms. This pilot study aimed to explore if the tunics of volunteer bushfire and forestry firefighters in Western Australia off-gas any contaminants after exposure to prescribed burns or bushfires, and whether there is a need to explore this further. Nine tunics were collected from firefighters following nine bushfire and prescribed burn events, with a set of unused tunics serving as a control. Chemical analysis was performed on these tunics to assess levels of acrolein, benzene, formaldehyde, and sulphur dioxide contamination. The assessment involved measuring chemical off-gassing over a 12 h period using infrared spectrometry. Tunics worn by firefighters appear to adsorb acrolein, benzene, formaldehyde, and sulphur dioxide from bushfire smoke and these contaminants are emitted from firefighting tunics following contamination at elevated concentrations. Further investigation of this research with a larger study sample will be beneficial to understand this phenomenon better and to determine the full extent and range of chemical contaminants absorbed by all firefighter clothing.

Background: Bushfire smoke is a complex mixture of hazardous substances. Inhalation poses acute and chronic health risks to firefighters, including respiratory and cardiovascular effects and potential risk for certain cancers. Aims: This paper addresses specific questions from Australian firefighters (via a Fulbright report based on extensive interviews) regarding bushfire smoke. It provides an overview of current understanding and evidence-based recommendations for minimizing exposure and mitigating health risks. Methods: A review of scientific literature and relevant organizational reports and standards was undertaken to search for evidence to answer the questions raised by Australian bushfire firefighters regarding bushfire smoke exposure and related health and safety topics. The questions were gathered through site visits and interviews with fire service agencies and researchers throughout Australia, as detailed in the Fulbright report. Key results: The literature review emphasizes the importance of personal protective equipment (PPE), improved decontamination protocols, the need for real-time exposure monitoring and adequate exposure reduction policies. Addressing the specific questions posed by firefighters is a key outcome of this work. Conclusions: Bushfire smoke exposure presents significant health risks to firefighters, necessitating comprehensive mitigation strategies. Implications: Findings highlight the need for consistent PPE use, improved decontamination and further research to enhance firefighter safety.

The aim of this study was to analyse the Western Australian (WA) Safety Regulatory System (SRS) database to assess compliance of the WA mining sector regarding workers exposure to welding fumes and to identify trends over time. De-identified data analysed to assess the impact of reducing workplace exposure standards (WES) for general welding fumes on industry compliance. Historical trend analysis shows a shift from 100% compliance to 100% non-compliance, based on mean values and 95% confidence intervals, with exposure levels remaining consistent over time. These findings highlight the need for current, innovative engineering solutions, and raise questions about the validity of current sampling methods. Powered air-purifying respirators (PAPRs) integrated with welding helmets can reduce exposures by up to 99.96%, making their adoption as industry best practice critical, yet current sampling methodologies measure welding fume levels outside PAPRs, thus potentially misclassifying workers who are adequately protected as non-compliant. The sampling method is also influenced by other particulate matter present in the workplace that may be due to grinding or other dust generating activities in the vicinity of the welder. Lower WES values necessitate a review of exposure assessment and reporting methods to accurately reflect worker exposures.

The link between occupational exposure to Respirable Crystalline Silica (RCS) and silicosis, a potentially fatal respiratory disease, has been well-established, leading to global reductions in RCS Exposure Standards (ES). In Western Australia (WA), RCS data have been collected by the Department of Energy, Mining, Industry Regulation and Safety (DEMIRS) from 1986 to 2024 (n = 144,141). These results were analysed to assess the impacts of recent changes to the ES on compliance. Findings suggest that the WA mining sector, regardless of commodity type, is compliant with RCS exposures as assessed against the 0.05 mg/m³ ES (2019). Laboratory technicians, exploratory drilling, miscellaneous trades/utilities, trades assistant, sample preparation, and sampler/sample operator are SEGS that had the highest RCS exposures. Exposure assessment did not account for the protection provided by respiratory protective equipment (RPE). In the WA mining sector, a robust respiratory protection regime is enforced that includes respirator fit testing, and this is most likely the case throughout Australia. On the balance of epidemiological evidence, industry compliance over decades, reducing exposure profiles, and robust RPE programmes, it could be argued that further reductions to the RCS exposure standard are not justified. Regulators need to consider the protection provided by respirators in exposure assessment.