Each year in Washington, wildfire season arrives with a familiar sense of unease.
The smoke that settles into our valleys, the images of aircraft and engines converging on distant ridgelines, and the stories of families forced to evacuate have become an increasingly common part of life in the Pacific Northwest.
This year, there is growing concern that the 2026 wildfire season could be especially challenging.
State climatologists and fire officials are pointing to low snowpack, persistent drought conditions and early-season fires as indicators that Washington may once again face an active and potentially severe fire season. Public Lands Commissioner Dave Upthegrove has warned that Washington is entering its fourth consecutive year of drought conditions, a trend that increases fire risk and places additional stress on already weakened forests.
As a firefighter, a Thurston County commissioner, and a member of the Washington state Emergency Management Council, I spend a significant amount of time thinking about how emergencies are organized, funded, and sustained. These roles provide me with a unique perspective.
On the front lines, I’ve seen what it takes to respond when conditions deteriorate rapidly. In local government, I’ve helped make decisions about public safety funding and regional preparedness. And through the Emergency Management Council, I’ve had the opportunity to participate in broader discussions about how Washington coordinates disasters that no single jurisdiction can manage alone.
The three perspectives all lead to the same conclusion: large-scale emergencies depend on systems that are built long before the first alarm is sounded. Because while the public often sees wildfire response as a dramatic deployment of engines and aircraft, what they may not realize is that large wildfires operate much like military campaigns.
They involve hundreds, sometimes thousands, of personnel: firefighters, law enforcement officers, emergency managers, heavy equipment operators, cooks, aviation resources, private contract crews, public works staff, utility companies, mechanics, meteorologists, bookkeepers, chainsaw operators, state agencies, federal agencies and, in some cases, even international resources. No single jurisdiction can manage a large wildfire alone.
When a fire starts, the local fire district or agency typically bears the initial burden. Local firefighters respond first, often with limited information and limited resources. If they can’t get it under control and conditions worsen, mutual aid is requested. As the incident grows, responsibility expands upward, and complexity grows. The state becomes involved, Federal agencies may assume a larger role, national resources are mobilized and incident management teams arrive. Costs rise rapidly; the scale can be difficult to comprehend.
Washington spent nearly $300 million suppressing wildfires last year, and officials described that season as relatively average. More than 95 percent of fires were kept under 10 acres, a testament to the importance of rapid initial attack and early intervention. That success depends on one critical assumption: agencies that send personnel and equipment will be reimbursed promptly. When firefighters from a local district deploy to a large incident elsewhere in the state, their salaries, overtime, apparatus use, and equipment costs are initially borne by their home agency. Those costs are later reimbursed through state and federal mechanisms. That reimbursement is not a luxury, it is essential.
A small city or rural fire district cannot reasonably be expected to subsidize major firefighting operations in another part of the state or country. That would shift a national responsibility onto local taxpayers. Our agencies answer the call because they believe in the mutual aid system and because they trust that reimbursement will follow. If that trust erodes, resource availability becomes uncertain and uncertainty during wildfire season is dangerous.
This year, new concerns have emerged over federal contract requirements tied to broader policy disputes involving diversity, immigration, and other issues unrelated to emergency response. Washington and several other states have reported that new federal terms have delayed wildfire grants and slowed the execution of agreements needed for forest health and wildfire mitigation work. Approximately 10 Washington communities were expected to receive Community Wildfire Defense Grants, but those awards have reportedly been placed on hold while legal and administrative questions are resolved.
Perhaps most concerning, many emergency management and forestry partners have not yet had the opportunity to fully review updated federal contract requirements. As of now, much of what local officials know has come through secondhand reports, rumors and industry discussions rather than finalized agreements. That uncertainty makes planning more difficult at precisely the time when preparation should be accelerating.
One of the most important lessons in emergency management is that large-scale disasters are inherently collaborative. Wildfires do not respect jurisdictional boundaries. They do not care whether the land is federal, state, county, tribal, or private. And they do not wait for governments to settle policy disputes. The system works because agencies trust one another and because each level of government fulfills its role.
Local agencies provide immediate response.
States coordinate regional resources.
The federal government supplies funding, aircraft, personnel, and logistical support.
When any one part of that system becomes unstable, the effects ripple outward.
There is some good news.
The Washington state Legislature restored $60 million in wildfire preparedness funding this year, bringing total support for wildfire response, forest restoration, and community resilience back to approximately $120 million. Those investments support aviation resources, detection cameras, grants to rural fire departments, prescribed burns, and seasonal staffing. That restoration reflects an important principle: it is far less expensive to prepare for disasters than it is to respond to them after they grow out of control. But state investments alone cannot replace the full scale of federal support required during major incidents.
The wildfire system is designed as a partnership, and partnerships depend on clarity, predictability, and trust.
Every year, firefighters and emergency managers prepare for conditions they hope never materialize.
That is the nature of the profession, you train, you coordinate, you build relationships, you stage resources, and you trust that the systems supporting those efforts will function when needed.
As we approach the summer of 2026, Washington has every reason to take wildfire risk seriously.
The weather suggests a difficult season.
The state has taken meaningful steps to prepare.
But questions surrounding federal funding and reimbursement add an element of uncertainty that deserves public attention. Wildfires are among the most complex emergencies we face.
They require extraordinary cooperation across every level of government.
And when the flames are moving, the last thing responders should be worried about is whether the resources they depend on will be there.
In wildfire response, certainty and time save lives and protect property.
•••
Wayne Fournier is a firefighter, Thurston County commissioner and former mayor who has spent more than three decades working in public safety. His column appears in The Chronicle twice each month.
