Cited by 59Water Treatment and DisinfectionFire effects on ecosystemsToxic Organic Pollutants Impact

Lasting Effects of Wildfire on Disinfection By‐Product Formation in Forest Catchments

Chow, Alex T., Tsai, Kuo‐Pei, Fegel, Timothy S., Pierson, Derek N., Rhoades, Charles C.·2019·Journal of Environmental Quality

Abstract

Severe wildfires often have dramatic short‐term effects on water quality, although there is increasing evidence that in some catchments their effects can persist for many years. Forest recovery after the 2002 Hayman Fire burned catchments that supply drinking water to over a half million users in Denver, CO, has been extremely slow and has caused persistent water quality concerns. To evaluate whether postfire water quality changes increase the potential to form undesirable by‐products of water disinfection, we compared stream water from eight burned catchments within the Hayman Fire and five adjacent unburned catchments. We tested dissolved organic carbon (DOC) concentrations and the formation of disinfection by‐products (trihalomethanes [THMs], haloacetonitriles [HANs], chloral hydrate [CHD, and haloketones [HKTs]) in stream water monthly during 2014 and 2015. Stream DOC, THMs, and CHD and specific ultraviolet absorbance at 254 nm (SUVA 254) were elevated in catchments with a moderate extent of high‐severity wildfire (8–46% of catchment area) relative to catchments that were unburned and those that burned more extensively (>74% of catchment area) 14 yr after the fire. In contrast, formation of highly toxic but unregulated nitrogenous HANs increased linearly with wildfire extent. Although these findings should not raise concern regarding drinking water safety, they highlight the long‐term influences of high severity wildfire on source water C content, composition, and treatability. Core Ideas: Wildfire impacts on source water quality could last over a decade. Formation of highly toxic nitrogenous DBP precursors increased linearly with wildfire extent. DBP formation was highest in streams draining moderately burned catchments.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.2134/jeq2019.04.0172

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Chow, A. T., Tsai, K., Fegel, T. S., Pierson, D. N., & Rhoades, C. C.
Affiliations
  • Clemson University (US)
  • National Taiwan University (TW)
  • US Forest Service (US)
  • Oregon State University (US)
Corresponding author
Chow, Alex T.
Venue
Journal of Environmental Quality
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2019-11
Volume
48
Issue
6
Pages
1826-1834
ISSN
  • 0047-2425 (ISSN-L)
  • 1537-2537
OpenAlex
W2976040069
Cited by
59
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 8 · 2025: 15 · 2024: 15 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 5 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 7
FWCI
1.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
Journal of Environmental Quality (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Forest Service
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Water Treatment and Disinfection
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Health, Toxicology and Mutagenesis › Toxic Organic Pollutants Impact
Keywords
wildfire effects, disinfection by-products, dissolved organic carbon, trihalomethanes, haloacetonitriles, chloral hydrate, haloketones, forested watersheds, Hayman Fire, burned area, raw water quality, stream water, long-term recovery, drinking water

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review