05/24/2026
2.35 million reasons to adhere to campfire bans and other burning regulations.
🚨 A U.S. man has officially lost his appeal over a massive $2.35 million wildfire penalty tied to a 2018 B.C. wildfire that burned through a sensitive ecological area in the Discovery Islands.
James Flack May 24 2026
According to reporting and tribunal findings, Duffy Damgaard was found, on a balance of probabilities, to have started the Pendrell Island wildfire on East Redonda Island in August 2018. The fire ultimately scorched nearly 660 hectares of land in what is considered a highly sensitive ecological reserve area.
Investigators alleged the fire began after an open burn involving garbage during an active fire prohibition period. Under British Columbia’s Wildfire Act, individuals found responsible for starting wildfires can be held financially liable for suppression costs, environmental damage, and losses to Crown resources.
In this case, the province assessed roughly $2.35 million in damages and firefighting costs.
The case is significant because it reinforces how aggressively provinces are now pursuing cost recovery related to human-caused wildfires, especially as wildfire seasons become longer, more destructive, and more expensive for taxpayers.
Tribunal records reportedly heard that Damgaard, a resident of San Francisco at the time, had travelled into the area by vessel from Seattle prior to the wildfire.
The ruling also highlights something many Canadians are increasingly debating: accountability.
As wildfire seasons intensify across Western Canada, governments are facing billions in suppression costs, evacuations, infrastructure damage, insurance losses, and environmental destruction. Human-caused fires, whether accidental or negligent, are drawing far greater scrutiny than they once did.
British Columbia’s Wildfire Act allows the province to pursue financial recovery when investigators determine someone caused or contributed to a wildfire. The legal threshold in this case was not criminal conviction beyond a reasonable doubt, but rather the civil standard of a “balance of probabilities.”
That distinction matters.
The tribunal concluded there was sufficient evidence to uphold the province’s findings and financial penalties.
With another difficult wildfire season already underway across parts of Canada, cases like this are likely to become increasingly important precedents moving forward.
