There is increasing international concern about the environmental impacts of refugees on host areas, with governments calling for compensation for environmental damage, particularly concerning the loss of woodland resources as a result of demand for wood for fuel. In addition to an obvious increase in the population of host areas, concern about refugees' woodfuel-use centres on the notion that they are 'exceptional resource degraders'. Since they view their stay as temporary, it is argued, they therefore do not have any incentive to use resources in a way that is sustainable in the long term. This study examined refugee migration to the middle valley of the Senegal River, and compared woodfuel use by refugee and local populations. Drawing on a household survey and direct measurement of woodfuel use, little or no evidence is found to support the expectation that refugees use more wood for fuel than local people, or that they are more destructive in their collection or use of wood. This is important since it suggests that policy measures developed to reduce what is perceived as excess demand by refugees, notably through the introduction of fuel-efficient stoves, are unlikely to be successful. Reforestation schemes have been relatively unsuccessful in addressing supply or demand for wood.