Managing Risk from Good Fire: Prescribed Fire and Liability Insurance
By Jenna Knobloch
Prescribed fire is an essential part of reducing risk from catastrophic wildfires and improving ecosystem health. One of the barriers to expanding use of this important tool is the availability and cost of prescribed fire liability insurance, which has become increasingly harder to get. We review new and old risk transfer mechanisms specific to prescribed fire, evaluating their effectiveness, and review proposals to expand the availability of coverage in order to expand the use of beneficial prescribed burns.
What is prescribed fire? What are the benefits for wildfire resilience?
Prescribed fire, also known as controlled burning, is a planned ignition to meet land management objectives. Many of the forest and grassland ecosystems of the western United States rely on fire. For decades, however, the United States pursued a policy of fire suppression, extinguishing as many fires as quickly as possible. Not only did this harm ecosystem health, it led to a dangerous build up of “fuels” or combustible plant materials such as shrubs or other understory growth, downed trees and branches, and fallen needles. Prior to fire suppression interventions, more frequent and less severe fire would minimize the amount of these materials, opening up light and resources for fire-adapted species. Now, with so much fuel, fires often burn hotter and more severely than was historically normal, threatening human communities and ecosystems alike.
While there are many uses of fire as a land management tool, two of the most important for addressing the increasing risk of catastrophic wildfires are treating fuels and the expansion of indigenous burning. Fuel treatment means reducing the build-up of fuels, which can be done mechanically, such as by cutting, or through controlled burns.
Before the removal of Indigenous peoples from their homelands and the development of sophisticated wildfire firefighting operations, wildfires and cultural burning practices were keystone ecological processes in most ecosystems in North America. Exclusion of these processes, including prior Forest Service suppression policies that sought rapid and complete extinguishment of every fire start, no matter how remote, have contributed to the massive buildup of fuels and changes to the structure and species composition of vegetation, favoring more severe wildfires. This is what has been called “the fire paradox”: limiting all fire through a strategy that only emphasizes extinguishing wildfire starts will make the conditions of future wildfires worse because of the buildup of fuels.
Expansion of the use of prescribed fire–both indigenous burns and those done by other land managers–can thus be a critical part of mitigating wildfire risk in our forests. When done at an effective scale, a fuel treatment area is like a speed bump for wildfire: reducing rate of spread, ember production, and smoke, while also improving firefighting efficacy and safety, even in extreme fire weather. Beyond risk reduction, there are other important benefits like improving ecosystem function and promoting growth of culturally important plans. Of course, community safety from wildfire also requires land use and building that is ignition-resistant.
In 2021 the massive and fast moving Bootleg Fire ran into a thinning and prescribed fire project planned by the Klamath Tribes and the US Forest Service in eastern Oregon. Printed with permission. Photo Credit: Steve Rondeau, Nature Resources Director for the Klamath Tribes.
What are the risks of prescribed fire?
Extensive planning and preparation goes into prescribed fire, and it is generally very safe. “Initial entry” mechanical treatments establish any needed fire lines and remove problematic “ladder fuels” that can carry fire to the canopy and thus lead to a devastating fire. Burn plans, created for every prescribed burn, lay out safety measures and what the burn is intending to accomplish. These plans can cover a wide range of factors such as fuel conditions and fire breaks, weather, smoke dispersion, equipment and personnel needed for burn objectives and safety, and community outreach. Less than 1% of prescribed fires “escape” to become a wildfire. Those few that do escape, however, can sometimes cause serious consequences. An extreme example was the 2022 Hermits Peak-Calf Canyon fire, the most severe wildfire in the state of New Mexico’s history, which started from two escaped prescribed fires on national forestland.
What happens when a prescribed fire causes damage?
For private lands, if a prescribed fire escapes and causes damage, the burn boss (person who is in charge of prescribed fire operations) and the landowner can be liable for property damage, bodily injury, environmental impairment, and the cost of the fire suppression resources. Even relatively small escapes that do not burn structures can still have costs, such as from damage to fencing or the market value of burned timber. Liability insurance would cover these types of damages. Of note, this is most critical for private landowners since the Federal government liability is handled by the Tort Claims Act.
What is the role of training in reducing risk and liability?
Prescribed fire training is a central part of managing prescribed fire risk and building shared expectations of best practices. The gold standard for prescribed fire training is through the National Wildland Fire Coordinating Group (NWCG), but this is inaccessible and out of reach for many burn professionals, landowners, and indigenous practitioners as it is only for Federal wildland fire agencies. To help support private lands burning, many states have established their own training programs specific to their needs. Eligibility for many risk transfer options for liability discussed below explicitly require prescribed fire training and also a track record of safe experience using prescribed fire.
Who can obtain private prescribed fire insurance?
Private prescribed fire liability insurance can be purchased by practitioners and landowners to cover damages in the event of an escape. This type of insurance protection is critical to prescribed burning, since there is a small chance of devastating financial losses for both the burn boss and the landowner. However, this insurance is becoming more costly, available to fewer organizations, and offered by fewer companies. These trends are being driven by insurers stepping back from wildfire-related exposure following recent unprecedented increases in costs. The risk of wildfire is growing throughout the American west as the climate warms and recent fires have demonstrated to insurers how incredibly costly wildfires can now be. Adding to the challenge, many insurers lack understanding of prescribed fire. That said, while prescribed fire is traditionally wrapped into insurance for other kinds of land management such as logging and agriculture, some insurers have developed a stand alone prescribed fire-specific product to help fill this niche market.
To ensure a lower risk of claims payouts, many insurers still offering this coverage are requiring training and experience of anyone named on the policy. As newer state certification programs mature, they are increasingly being considered for private insurance coverage. In addition to certification, insurers consider hands-on experience. This is part of a larger workforce challenge in prescribed fire: it takes many hours of experiential training to become proficient enough to lead a large burn. Expanding training opportunities with live fire is going to be essential for expanding prescribed fire to reach our fuel management goals, manage growing risks, and support the wider accessibility of prescribed fire insurance.
This is where grassroots organizations like prescribed burn associations and prescribed fire councils can help. Their efforts expand opportunities for practitioners to gain experience, such as organizing neighborhood “Learn and Burns,” finding opportunities for student burn crew programs, and offering training programs like Prescribed Fire Training Exchanges (TREX). Combining training with access to insurance is a promising approach. For example, the Alabama Prescribed Fire Council and prescribed fire insurer Conservation United developed a plan that pooled coverage for 175 council members, helping to ease the burden of managing separate plans and lowering the rate relative to individual plans.
“Conservation United is dedicated to collaborating with the prescribed fire community and prescribed fire councils to innovate and enhance coverage. By aligning with these organizations, we aim to develop tailored insurance products, ensuring robust protection for their vital work in land stewardship.” — Robert Johnston, Conservation United
What legal protections exist to help reduce liability for prescribed burn practitioners?
Public policies have also been adopted to lower costs for those undertaking prescribed burns, which should in theory, also make insurance easier and less expensive to provide. Some states, particularly in the southeastern US, passed “Right to Burn” laws, which made it harder to prove negligence for prescribed fire conducted by trained practitioners. This, in turn, made it more difficult to hold the landowner or burner liable for damage. There are some downsides to this: it can lower political support for prescribed fire among those whose property might be damaged by an escaped burn if they worry they will not be able to collect payouts if they suffer damages. This is why many prescribed fire advocates propose pairing policies like this with liability funds.
What is the role of state-run prescribed fire liability funds?
With liability insurance for controlled burns hard to obtain, in 2022, the state of California established a $20 million pool for the Prescribed Fire Liability Claims Fund Pilot to cover many kinds of losses from prescribed fire. Practitioners who meet certain standards are eligible to enroll, including the California State Certified Prescribed Fire Burn Boss program established in 2021. In 2024 Oregon followed suit, establishing a liability fund pilot with $10 million, tying coverage to its new Certified Burn Manager program. The state of Washington just created a similar program with the passage of HB 1563, which was signed into law in April 2025. Importantly, these programs include indigenous cultural burning in their criteria for eligibility. There is also interest in scaling this concept up to create a national compensation fund (for example, Recommendation 10 of the Wildland Fire Mitigation and Management Commission).
While these programs complement what is offered from private risk coverage, they are not a replacement for insurance and are not built to cover all prescribed fire risk. In fact, they were developed, in part, to create a more supportive environment for private insurers. While it is yet unclear whether these pilots will help to expand or maintain private market availability, they do have an important role in building general support for prescribed fire use by reassuring those who might be impacted that there is a mechanism for some coverage.
Weaving a Safety Net: Complementary Mechanisms for Risk Transfer
Prescribed fire insurance has become harder to attain and more costly. Several solutions are being explored in fire-prone areas:
The development of new business models and approaches, such as Conservation United’s work to cover prescribed fire council members.
Creating a supportive risk environment, including investment in workforce training and live fire experience for private landowners and practitioners.
Establishment of state and/or federal liability funds.
Clarifying the liability standards for prescribed fire.
For many states, especially in the west, many of these programs are new, being tested during a dynamic time for prescribed fire policy and insurance markets. To allow prescribed fire to expand it is essential we are proactively weaving complementary risk management strategies together, expanding what is working to more states, learning from what is not working, and developing new options to cover gaps.
