Nine U.S. senators asked regulators on August 3 to shut down online bet markets on wildfires, warning that wagering on active blazes could encourage arson or interference with firefighting. The letter went to Michael Selig and put the Commodity Futures Trading Commission under fresh pressure just as wildfires were burning in Washington and Oregon.
Jeff Merkley said the practice belongs in the same category as war and assassination wagers, arguing that even a small risk should not be tolerated. He also said wildfire betting falls into the same no-man’s land as those banned or widely rejected markets, making the message from the senators harder to ignore.
The push lands in a corner of the prediction market business that has already proved it can attract real money. During the January 2025 Palisades and Eaton fires in Los Angeles, betting stakes on Polymarket topped $1.2 million. Those fires killed 31 people and destroyed more than 16,000 homes, and they showed how quickly a disaster can become a trading event on platforms built around yes-or-no outcomes.
That is also why the issue is not limited to one company. Kalshi and Polymarket both let users wager on a wide range of natural disasters, and Kalshi is legal in the U.S. while offering bets on events such as earthquakes and hurricanes. But Kalshi does not cover fires, and as of August 6 neither platform had active wildfire betting opportunities.
The friction is that the market has already existed, even if it is now paused. Until early August, Wyldfyre.io also allowed people to bet on wildfires under the slogan, “You can’t predict fire, but you can trade on it.” Wyldfyre.io has since been shut down, but its brief run shows how quickly these wagers can surface when a disaster is unfolding.
For regulators, the harder question is not whether wildfire betting sounds wrong. It is whether existing derivatives rules already give the Commodity Futures Trading Commission enough room to treat it as a prohibited market and act without waiting for a new law. The senators have made their case. What comes next is whether Michael Selig turns that warning into a formal move against wildfire wagering, or leaves the ban question hanging while the fire season keeps going.
