Fire chiefs and water managers in California are working together to address the growing challenge of wildfires threatening community water systems. The 2017 Tubbs Fire in Santa Rosa brought attention to how wildfires can damage water infrastructure, a problem that has become more urgent with recent fires, including those in Los Angeles in January 2025.
Faith Kearns, a scientist and research communication practitioner, noted that the intersection between fire response and water management is now testing both systems at once. “We must re-examine what is realistically possible for fire departments and water systems to do,” she said.
Kearns and colleagues are addressing these issues through workshops and the Water + Fire Research and Policy Coordination Network. This initiative, supported by UCLA’s Sustainable LA Grand Challenge along with the Luskin Center for Innovation and UC Agriculture and Natural Resources, brings together researchers, policymakers, and practitioners to develop solutions for preparedness and recovery at the point where water supply meets wildfire risk.
One example comes from Lake County, north of the Bay Area. Fire Chief Willie Sapeta has led efforts to ensure adequate water supplies for firefighting in a region that has faced some of California’s most destructive wildfires over the past decade. Sapeta began his career as a volunteer in Middletown in 1980 before becoming fire chief in 2012. His longstanding relationships with local water companies have helped forge early technical collaboration.
“We ordered the hydrants, they installed them,” Sapeta said. “That meant we understood their systems, and they trusted us.”
Lake County’s vulnerability is heightened by frequent large fires—between 2012 and 2024 over 65% of its land mass burned—and by its demographic profile: about 68,000 residents as of 2023 with a median household income around $58,700. Over one-fifth of residents report having a disability.
As larger fires overwhelmed resources starting around 2010, firefighters had to improvise when traditional potable water sources failed or ran low. These challenges led Sapeta’s department to coordinate more closely with local water companies. In 2021 this collaboration became formalized as the Lake County Water Association (LCWA), representing most county systems.
“For us, collaboration wasn’t theoretical, it came out of necessity,” Sapeta said. “We had fires where systems hemorrhaged water resulting in complete loss of a water system. We realized we had to plan together.”
Now LCWA meets monthly with fire chiefs to review vulnerabilities and plan joint projects; it also created an emergency guidebook and designated regional liaisons for major incidents.
Sapeta developed a framework so alternate water supply plans can be activated quickly when needed—for example if hydrant flow tests show failure or if multiple-structure fires occur. The plan includes seeking funding for portable pumps positioned near major lakes or intake lines; each pump package would include hoses capable of filling several engines at once.
Roles are clearly defined: liaisons connect fire command with LCWA personnel who deploy pumps or identify raw-water sources during emergencies.
By late 2025 key elements were operationalized: inter-ties among four main water systems allow millions of gallons to move throughout Lake County Fire Protection District; each company maintains direct contact with Chief Sapeta within unified command structures.
A fully certified portable pump costs nearly $300K but agricultural pumps may suffice at lower cost; Sapeta advocates shared ownership among cities/counties charged on usage basis. Backup generators remain another priority during outages.
Quarterly training exercises using portable pumps are planned as part of ongoing improvements—alongside further integration of agricultural/industrial sources into emergency planning.
Sapeta stresses that technical fixes alone are not enough: relationships matter just as much as equipment or protocols do.
“You don’t know your firefighting capabilities until you know your water company’s capabilities,” he said. “The rest is about working together before the next big one.”
He believes other communities—urban or rural—can adapt this collaborative approach if someone starts the conversation: “Large metropolitan areas can do this too.”
Lake County’s model demonstrates how clear procedures combined with strong partnerships can help reduce losses from extreme events even if risk cannot be eliminated entirely.