The President's Fiscal Year (FY) 2027 Budget Request once again proposes to create a new agency within the Department of the Interior (DOI) to consolidate all federal wildfire responsibilities.

Federal spending on wildfire is spread throughout the federal government. The U.S. Forest Service (USFS) Wildland Fire Management (WFM) account oversees the majority of expenditures for wildfire response activities on federal lands, including firefighter salaries and equipment. DOI also has a WFM account, although it is significantly smaller.

Last year, the President's FY2026 budget request called for the creation of a U.S. Wildland Fire Service to be housed within DOI. The proposed agency largely mirrored the current structure of the DOI WFM, with a couple of new line items. Congress, however, continued to fund wildfire under both USFS and DOI for FY2026. As part of the appropriations bill, Congress requested a comprehensive study on the impacts of consolidation.

Around the same time last year, the Administration issued an executive order calling on DOI and USDA to consolidate their wildland fire programs "to the maximum degree practicable and consistent with applicable law." This January, DOI announced it was "taking the next step to establish the U.S. Wildland Fire Service" and appointed a new leader to oversee its implementation. While this latest action does not currently affect USFS, it does begin to build a framework for future cross-agency consolidation.

Now, once again, the Administration has requested federal wildfire funding under the U.S. Wildland Fire Service. The proposed agency structure is identical to last year's proposal.

How Much Would the FY2027 Budget Request Spend on Wildfire?

The President's FY2027 Budget Request would consolidate federal wildfire funding into eight line items under DOI. The structure largely mimics the current DOI WFM organization, although the budget proposed two new line items: Intelligence and Technology and Grants and Partnerships.

The request would keep base wildfire funding relatively stable —a light dip from $3.85 billion to $3.84 billion—and increase the Wildfire Suppression Operation Reserve Fund by $100 million, its maximum funding level under current law (more on this below). However, proposed consolidation and re-organization make it difficult to compare specific line items in the President's budget request with FY2026 enacted levels. For example, USFS currently funds personnel costs through a distinct Salaries & Expenses line item, whereas DOI currently funds personnel costs within each activity line item. Furthermore, the budget request describes proposed increases in funding, personnel, and equipment compared to the current DOI program—excluding the larger, USFS program.

Wildfire Budget Requests and Regular Appropriations (thousands of dollars) 

*FY2025 Actuals, as reported by the DOI and USFS, may differ from enacted appropriations under the FY2025 Continuing Resolution.

• Preparedness – $1.6 billion: Primarily funds firefighter salaries and equipment acquisition and maintenance. The budget request is a 19% decrease from FY2026 enacted levels, assuming all activities currently funded under the USFS Salaries & Expenses line item—including both firefighter and non-firefighter personnel—are shifted into this new account.
• Suppression – $1.4 billion: Funds incident management personnel, aviation and operational assets, logistical services, supplies and equipment, and temporary emergency firefighters. This baseline funding is required to trigger access to the Wildfire Suppression Operations Reserve Fund, and equals the wildfire suppression funding requested in the President’s 2015 Budget, which was calculated based on the prior 10-year average.
• Fuels Management – $834 million: Supports fuels reduction projects on DOI- and USFS-managed lands, as well as some non-federal lands. This represents a 113% increase over FY2026 levels. The budget request proposes to expand hazardous fuels mitigation authorities, including by promoting the use of targeted grazing, increasing the maximum size of Categorical Exclusions (CEs), and expanding eligible non-Federal activities to all state and private land, not just land adjacent to Federal land.
• Burned Area Rehabilitation – $510 million: Supports restoration of fire-damaged landscapes unlikely to recover without human intervention. This request is consistent with FY2025 and FY2026 funding levels.
• Facilities Construction and Maintenance – $27 million: Covers infrastructure such as firefighter housing, storage for operations equipment, and aerial firefighting bases. This is also a 170% reduction from FY2026 levels.
• Intelligence and Technology – $123.5 million: Funds wildfire-related IT, research, and science efforts, including continuation of the Joint Fire Science Program and $20 million to establish a Wildland Fire Intelligence Center. There is currently no comparable line item. This request is more than 3x higher than the Administration’s request last year.
• Grants and Partnerships – $2.8 million: Supports “enhanced fire protection capabilities of key rural and volunteer fire departments through training, equipment purchases, and fire prevention work on a cost-shared basis.” It includes funding for the Volunteer Fire Assistance program. There is currently no comparable line item. This is identical to what the Administration requested last year.
• Wildfire Suppression Operations Reserve Fund – $2.95 billion: Provides emergency funds for wildfire suppression. The Reserve Fund was originally capped at $2.25 billion when it was first established in FY2020. Its maximum funding level increases by $100 million every fiscal year until FY2027.

U.S. Wildland Fire Service Taxpayer Benefits and Risks 

The creation of a new Federal Wildland Fire Service raises fundamental questions about the federal role in wildfire response and spending. And as we have written before, there are potential advantages and disadvantages to this approach.

In theory, a single agency could streamline federal wildfire response and coordination—both between agencies and with external partners. TCS has supported efforts to break down bureaucratic silos, improve interagency coordination, and make it easier for communities and individuals to access federal resources. A single agency could also improve transparency of wildfire spending. TCS has repeatedly documented how the current fragmented system makes it difficult to track federal wildfire spending. We have called for a comprehensive budget crosscut to help policymakers identify where spending is going and where it’s needed most.

But transferring wildfire management responsibilities from USFS to DOI poses serious challenges. USFS currently manages roughly 75% of the federal government’s wildfire resources—a smooth transition will be difficult, especially amid a year-round fire season. The movement of staff, assets, and expertise out of USFS, alongside proposed budget cuts, will also further gut the agency and its forest management activities. A complete separation of wildfire management and forest and land management is not only impractical but also impossible, as forest management activities affect wildfire risks. Some experts warn that the separation of the two will increase—not decrease—coordination issues and encourage a suppression-first mindset that ignores the ecological benefits of wildfire and ecological disadvantages of fuels management.