As wildfires continue to devastate California, some residents are turning to costly private firefighting measures to shield their homes from destruction. While these services offer an extra layer of protection, they have sparked intense debate over fairness and accessibility during emergencies.
According to a news report from CNN, the controversy gained traction this week after Los Angeles real estate executive Keith Wasserman posted a now-deleted plea on social media, offering to pay “any amount” for private firefighters to protect his Pacific Palisades home as the area’s wildfire intensified. The post drew backlash, with critics arguing that the wealthy should not have an advantage in safeguarding their properties.
“Whose home gets saved shouldn’t depend on their bank account,” commented one TikTok user, reflecting the widespread criticism online.
Private firefighting services on the rise
Despite the uproar, private firefighting services have become increasingly common, particularly in affluent areas. Companies like Allied Disaster Defense spray fire-retardant gels—similar to those used by aerial firefighting units—on properties to prevent flames from igniting structures.
Tim Bauer, senior vice president at Allied, noted that demand has surged during the ongoing fires in Pacific Palisades, with over 200 people on a waiting list for services. While the cost typically runs about $1,000 during non-emergency periods, prices have soared to $5,000 amid the current wildfire crisis.
One homeowner reportedly offered $100,000 to jump to the top of Bauer’s list, but he declined, adhering to the original order of requests. “People are desperate to protect their homes, and we’re doing our best to meet the demand fairly,” Bauer said.
Insurance companies step in
Private firefighting services are also increasingly offered by insurance companies aiming to mitigate the cost of claims. Chubb Insurance, for instance, provides “Wildfire Defense Services” to eligible clients, which include deploying professional firefighters, removing combustible materials, and applying fire-blocking gels.
Mike Stutts, a firefighter in Somerset, California, emphasised that most private firefighting efforts are tied to insurance companies rather than individuals directly hiring the services. “The goal is to prevent costly insurance payouts while protecting valuable properties,” he explained.
Fire-proof homes and personal hydrants
For some, the solution lies in proactive measures like fire-resistant construction and personal fire hydrants. Michael Owens, a Los Angeles real estate developer, has begun equipping high-end properties with fire-safe features, including a $100,000 personal fire hydrant.
Owens showcased one such home, listed at nearly $15 million in Westlake Village, to a family who recently lost their home in the Palisades fire. “This is the future of homebuilding in fire-prone areas,” Owens said, adding that he hopes the recent wildfires will push more homeowners to invest in fire-safe technologies.
In Malibu, a more affordable option has gained traction: the “Hainy Hydrant,” a personal fire hydrant developed by local resident Matt Haines. These hydrants, costing around $2,500, tap into a home’s water supply and can be installed by a plumber. Malibu resident Kevin Rosenbloom, whose home was rebuilt after a wildfire in 2007, called the hydrants “an essential first step” in fire protection.
No guarantees
Even with these costly measures, experts caution that no system can fully guarantee a home’s survival in the face of severe wildfires like those still raging in Pacific Palisades.
As debates over equity in wildfire response continue, Wasserman, whose social media post ignited controversy, has not responded to requests for comment. Meanwhile, the push for fire protection—whether through private firefighters or advanced home defenses—underscores the lengths some Californians are willing to go to safeguard their properties in an increasingly fire-prone state.