Using the same choice experiment surveys and same specification of mixed logit models are used in California (CA) and Florida (FL) to compare homeowners willingness to pay (WTP) for two types of fuel reduction programs. Comparing the WTP of homeowners in CA and FL for private and public wildfire risk reduction show that WTP for the private actions among households who perceive low to moderate wildfire risk is quite low, and probably lower than what their cost share would be for making significant wildfire risk reductions on their property and to their residence. However, these same individuals would pay substantially more for public programs to reduce wildfire risk in their neighborhoods and common/public lands around their neighborhoods. The results also suggest the highest priority for cost sharing funds would go to homeowners in areas who perceive their houses to be at high risk, and especially to cost share private actions on their own land.