Â鶹ÒùÔº

Cracks in the fireline: Report exposes gaps in U.S. wildfire response

As wildfire seasons grow longer, hotter, and more destructive, the demands placed on firefighters have intensified. Who among them gets counted when policymakers consider support and reform?

A new from the Stanford Woods Institute for the Environment's Climate and Energy Policy Program reveals that a lack of available data on this broad workforce—made up of federal, Tribal, state, local, and private firefighters—has hindered agency capacity to respond to wildfires and care for those on the front lines.

"There's no one system that tracks each individual participating in wildfire response across agencies," said co-author Abigail Varney, a wildland fire fellow at the Stanford Doerr School of Sustainability and a federal wildland firefighter. "This makes it more difficult to ensure that the systems used to coordinate wildfire response efforts are effectively utilizing resources and properly accounting for the diverse needs of wildfire response personnel."

The report helps address this challenge by providing better data on the wildfire response workforce, including the number of personnel contributing to fire response efforts and recent trends.

Through interviews, public data, and cross-agency comparison, the researchers found that state and local fire departments account for the largest portion of the workforce with at least 100,000 personnel, and likely many more. Federal agencies employ more than 40,000 people involved with wildfire response, including staff in support roles. Around 15,000 firefighters work for private contractors and 1,500 work for Tribal programs. The U.S. Forest Service and the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection are the two largest employers of firefighters. This assessment is the most inclusive and comprehensive of its kind, according to the researchers.

The report highlights several underrecognized sectors:

• Tribal fire programs, many of which are operated independently through federal compacts, employ nearly 1,000 primary firefighters. Yet until recently, they were excluded from federal firefighter pay raises.
• Volunteer firefighters, who make up about 65% of the local fire service, are essential to rural fire response but may struggle to participate in the national fire response system due to bureaucratic hurdles, such as slow reimbursement processes.
• Private contractors, who provide a growing share of crews, aircraft, and equipment on large incidents, rely more heavily on immigrant or undocumented workers—including H-2B visa holders—who may face limited workplace protections.

Many wildfire responders, including volunteers, seasonal hires, collateral-duty staff, and incarcerated or immigrant laborers, often go uncounted in official data. As a result, their contributions are less visible to the public, news media, and policymakers. This means they can be overlooked when it comes to support such as better compensation and benefits.

"Failing to account for and integrate these groups within the fire response system reduces the available resource pool to respond to wildfires," said co-author Avery Bick, an academic fellow in the Environmental & Natural Resources Law & Policy Program at the Stanford Law School. "It also perpetuates inequities in how we value and support different segments of the workforce."

"Understanding the full makeup of the fire response system is the first step to making it safer, more effective, and more equitable," said Michael Mastrandrea, research director at the Climate and Energy Policy Program.

The authors argue for better data collection across all levels of the workforce and policy reforms that reflect the evolving structure of fire response in the U.S. They also recommend targeted support for historically undercounted and underrecognized groups who play increasingly important roles in wildfire response. The findings build on earlier work by the Stanford team addressing recruitment, retention, and equity in federal wildfire jobs.

As wildfires grow more severe and costly, a more inclusive approach to workforce planning, training, and compensation could mean the difference between a well-coordinated, rapid response—or a dangerously delayed one.