The Rise of Private Firefighting Services Sparks Debate

Private firefighting services gained national attention during January’s devastating wildfires in Los Angeles, but not all the publicity was positive. When one wealthy resident publicly offered to pay “any amount” for a private fire crew, backlash quickly followed. Similarly, former mayoral candidate Rick Caruso faced criticism for hiring private firefighters to protect his Palisades Village Mall while surrounding areas burned.

With nearly 12,000 structures destroyed, frustration over a system that seemingly favors the wealthy is understandable. However, misinformation about private firefighting is also spreading. While some believe these services cater exclusively to the rich, the reality is more complex.

At least 250 private fire services operate across the U.S., and their expertise doesn’t come cheap. According to Fox Business, a crew of 24 with four fire trucks costs around $10,000 per day. But despite these high fees, private crews rarely work directly for individual homeowners. Instead, most contract with government agencies or insurance companies to support fire suppression efforts, assist local fire departments, and provide preventative measures like fire hardening. Yahoo News reports that fewer than 1% of private fire crews work directly with homeowners, and those that do are often sent by insurance companies rather than hired independently.

Still, private fire services are not without controversy. Some public firefighters view them as a potential risk. In an interview with The New York Times, Brian Rice, president of the California Professional Firefighters, argued that private crews can be “a liability” because many lack training to operate safely in urban environments.

As wildfires become more frequent and intense, the role of private fire services is likely to grow. Whether they serve as a crucial supplement to public firefighting efforts or a symbol of inequality remains a heated debate.