Homeowner wildfire risk mitigation and preparedness are important components of community wildfire readiness. This report describes the data collected through two efforts conducted in the Cooper Landing, Alaska, study area: (1) parcel-level rapid wildfire risk assessments performed by trained assessors and (2) homeowner surveys in which respondents provided self-assessments of their parcel-level wildfire risk. This project was undertaken to support the Kenai Peninsula Borough Office of Emergency Management and Cooper Landing Emergency Services to inform decisions about wildfire adaptation. The household surveys explored the social dimensions of wildfire, including understanding of wildfire risk, outreach or communication preferences, mitigation and evacuation preparedness activities, and perceptions of community risk reduction strategies. Overall, the study indicated a community that was engaged in preparing for and mitigating the risk of wildfire yet had more that could be done to reduce its risk.

Homeowner wildfire risk mitigation and preparedness are important components of community wildfire readiness. This report describes the data collected through two efforts conducted in the Nikiski, Alaska, study area: (1) parcel-level rapid wildfire risk assessments performed by trained assessors and (2) homeowner surveys in which respondents provided self-assessments of their parcel-level wildfire risk. This project was undertaken to support the Kenai Peninsula Borough Office of Emergency Management, and the Nikiski Fire Service Area to inform decisions about wildfire adaptation. The household surveys explored the social dimensions of wildfire, including understanding of wildfire risk, outreach or communication preferences, mitigation and evacuation preparedness activities, and perceptions of community risk reduction strategies. The results provide evidence that despite some results seeming to suggest lower wildfire risk perceptions, respondents indicate taking action to reduce risk on their properties, support fuels management on adjacent public lands, and express interest in opportunities to undertake both mitigation and emergency preparedness activities to reduce risks associated with the threat of wildfire.

Invasive annual grasses (IAG) continue to spread within the sagebrush biome of the western United States, degrading plant communities and wildlife habitat, decreasing forage for ranching livelihoods, and heightening wildfire risk. Effective management of IAGs requires action and long-term strategic planning across the sagebrush biome, but the cumulative effects of IAG treatments over time and space are not well understood, especially over broad extents defined for strategies like the Sagebrush Conservation Design. We developed a simulation model and sampling framework that allow local-scale actions to be ‘scaled up’ to evaluate large-scale regional and biome-wide management strategy outcomes. We worked with natural resource managers and experts to co-develop a spatially explicit state-and-transition simulation model of IAG dynamics in sagebrush landscapes that can be used to evaluate alternative management strategies. We evaluated our framework by contrasting two baseline scenarios in terms of their long-term effects on the sagebrush biome. We show that focusing management efforts on moderate to high IAG cover was effective at reducing full conversion to IAGs but failed to prevent widespread establishment of IAGs in core sagebrush areas, exposing them to increased risk of wildfire and wildlife habitat degradation. The results of our model help quantify the extent of the problem that IAGs pose to sagebrush ecosystems given current knowledge and management efforts. Our framework provides a platform to explore alternative management strategy outcomes and can help managers develop informed conservation plans with realistic expectations for return on investment of resources committed to sagebrush landscapes.

Natural resource managers strive to improve restoration efficiency across the vast network of public lands of the United States, seeking the best return on investment through innovation, geographic prioritization, and adaptive management. This challenge is exemplified by ecosystems dominated by sagebrush (Artemisia spp.), which occur across the western United States and have been degraded by increasing wildfire frequency driven by invasive plant spread, among other factors. However, both costs and effectiveness of sagebrush restoration can vary spatially due to management practices in addition to biotic and abiotic factors, and characterizing this variation could inform broad-scale planning. We leveraged published models of sagebrush recovery and treatment costs to predict and evaluate cost-effectiveness of aerial and drill seeding Artemisia spp. across 429 718 km2 that overlapped 12 US states. Compared to natural recovery, effectiveness for both methods was generally low, yet effectiveness was often greater, and costs were always greater, for drill than aerial seeding, resulting in slightly higher cost-effectiveness on average for drill seeding. Cost-effectiveness for both treatments increased near major roads and in areas with more repeated burns. Cost-effectiveness also increased with predisturbance cover of sagebrush but decreased with herbaceous cover. However, we also identified areas where aerial seeding was more cost-effective than drill seeding, particularly with greater slope. Our results provide spatially explicit estimates and potential mechanisms of cost-effectiveness for two common seeding methods for sagebrush, which can help prioritize limited resources, guide land use, and improve restoration efficiency and effectiveness across public rangelands of the western United States.

Community wildfire readiness includes homeowner wildfire risk mitigation and wildfire evacuation preparedness. This report presents results from a household survey distributed to homeowners in the study area around Santa Fe, New Mexico in 2024 which was a follow-up to a previous survey of homeowners of the same residences, consisting of mostly identical questions, that was conducted in 2021. This follow-up survey was motivated by the nearby 2022 Hermits Peak/Calf Canyon Fire. Comparison of results indicates general stability in the aggregated responses to most survey questions. As found previously, 2024 results indicate that Santa Fe survey respondents are engaged in preparing for wildfire, yet more could be done to reduce risk in study communities. Despite decreases between 2021 and 2024 in the acceptability of fuels treatment methods that concern the use of fire, respondents generally support multiple types of programs intended to reduce wildfire risk to the city, including most but not all types of fuels treatments on public lands.

Wildfire risk mitigation on private property is central to reducing community wildfire vulnerability. Homeowners have control over many of the key factors that contribute to wildfire risk on their parcels, yet vulnerable conditions persist. One potential explanation is a misalignment between homeowners' and trained assessors' perceptions of parcel-level wildfire risk. Prior research has documented a "risk gap" in a single community wherein owners often underestimate their parcel-level wildfire risk; however, it is unclear whether such misalignments are widespread. This study replicates and expands previous research by examining the parcel-level wildfire risk gap in 38 wildland-urban interface (WUI) communities across the Western United States using paired data from household surveys and parcel-level wildfire risk assessments by trained assessors. We find that homeowners and assessors often perceive parcel characteristics differently. Homeowners may systematically mis-weight their importance, tending to underweight key controllable factors such as building materials and defensible space, leading to meaningful divergence from trained assessor ratings. Accordingly, we also find that homeowners generally underestimate overall parcel wildfire risk compared to trained assessors. These results suggest that even when homeowners recognize attributes on their parcels that contribute to wildfire risk, they may not fully grasp how much the attributes contribute to overall parcel risk, potentially failing to recognize the need to undertake meaningful mitigation actions. The findings from this study contribute to the broader natural hazards literature on expert-layperson risk perception gaps and offer insights for improving wildfire communication, education, and mitigation strategies in WUI communities.

Homeowner wildfire risk mitigation and preparedness are important components of community wildfire readiness. This report describes the data collected through two efforts conducted in the Lake County, Colorado, study area: (1) parcel-level rapid wildfire risk assessments performed by trained assessors and (2) homeowner surveys in which respondents provided self-assessments of their parcel-level wildfire risk. This project was undertaken to support Colorado State Forest Service Salida Field Office and Leadville/Lake County Fire-Rescue. The household surveys explored the social dimensions of wildfire, including understanding of wildfire risk, outreach or communication preferences, mitigation and evacuation preparedness activities, and perceptions of community risk reduction strategies. Overall, the study results detail a community that was engaged in preparing for and mitigating the risk of wildfire while revealing more that could be done to reduce risk.

Background Wildfire risk in the United States is rising and remains a land management priority. The quantitative wildfire risk assessment (QWRA) framework integrates fuels, topography, weather and values at risk to estimate the potential change in value from wildfire. Within this, response functions (RFs) represent how values respond to fire intensity. These are often based on expert judgment, but variation across assessments is unclear. Aims This study uses data from the US Geological Survey (USGS) Wildfire Hazard and Risk Assessment Clearinghouse to characterize consistency and variation across categories and contexts. Methods We applied descriptive statistics to summarize RFs, using tables, box-and-whisker plots and heat maps stratified by highly valued resource or asset (HVRA) category and spatial scale. Key results RFs and value definitions vary, especially for ecosystem-related resources. Some functions, such as for buildings in the wildland-urban interface (WUI), translate well across contexts, while others require more input. Conclusions Some functions are broadly transferable, while others need customization. This analysis provides references and starting points for improvement to RFs in QWRAs. Interpretations Expanding the clearinghouse and dataset and building more transparency in expert elicitation can build trust among communities, agencies and end-users, and can support efficient use of limited resources to mitigate wildfire risk.

Forest restoration in a watershed can provide numerous ecological improvements and social benefits, including reducing the risk of extreme wildfire. Understanding the values of the accrued benefits can be used to evaluate the use of funds to support restoration. The Rio Grande watershed is a vast watershed covering approximately 335,000 mile2 (867,646 km2). The Rio Grande watershed provides a host of ecosystem services and recreation opportunities and supports municipal water supplies. We estimate the non-market values of forest restoration in the Rio Grande watershed using a choice experiment (CE) approach. While the ecological benefits are established in literature, we focus on the social characteristics, capturing the human-forest system in a comprehensive manner. Our results indicate a significant willingness to pay (WTP) for improving air quality, reducing private property damage, and creating local jobs, with the highest WTP for job creation. Split-sample analysis indicates respondents residing within the watershed highly value the socio-economic attributes of the restoration, while ecological attributes are preferred more outside of the watershed. Our results provide insights into the benefits of multi-dimensional services from forest restoration activities in a watershed.

Background Wildfire simulation models are used to derive maps of burn probability (BP) based on fuels, weather, topography and ignition locations, and BP maps are key components of wildfire risk assessments. Aims Few studies have compared BP maps with real-world fires to evaluate their suitability for near-future risk assessment. Here, we evaluated a BP map for the conterminous US based on the large fire simulation model FSim. Methods We compared BP with observed wildfires from 2016 to 2022 across 128 regions representing similar fire regimes (‘pyromes’). We evaluated the distribution of burned areas across BP values, and compared burned area distributions among fire size classes. Key results Across all pyromes, mean BP was moderately correlated with observed burned area. An average of 71% of burned area occurred in higher-BP classes, vs 79% expected. BP underpredicted burned area in the Mountain West, especially for extremely large fires. Conclusions The FSim BP map was useful for estimating subsequent wildfire hazard, but may have underestimated burned areas where input data did not reflect recent climate change, vegetation change or human ignition patterns. Implications Our evaluations indicate that caution is needed when relying on simulation-based BP maps to inform management decisions. Our results also highlight potential opportunities to improve model estimates.

Fuels treatments intended to reduce fuel loads and improve forest health on public lands offer one way to reduce wildfire hazards in the wildland-urban interface (WUI), where the natural and built environments meet. However, for fuels treatment implementation to be successful, it must comply with regulatory and scientific standards and be supported by local communities, as lack of acceptance can lead to alterations, delays, or abandonment. To foster support, public land managers can engage directly with residents in communities near treatment areas through various communication channels or engage indirectly through trusted local partners. This research uses paired household survey and observed parcel-level wildfire risk assessment data to investigate wildfire risk information sources' role in the acceptability of fuels treatment approaches on public lands near select WUI communities in the Western United States. We find that information deemed useful from sources is often positively correlated with acceptability, while information deemed not useful is sometimes negatively correlated. Local sources of information tend to be widely received, perceived as useful, and have positive correlations with acceptability, while nonlocal sources vary in their receipt, perceived usefulness, and correlations with acceptability. Public land managers, particularly those from national organizations, may benefit from leveraging and aligning messaging with trusted local partners. Developing fuels treatment plans that consider existing local sentiments may facilitate public trust in managers and acceptability of treatments.

Many regions of the world have seen an increase in highly destructive wildfires, driven by well-documented increases in burned area and growth of housing in the wildland–urban interface (WUI), which exposes more homes to fire. However, it is unclear whether wildfires are also becoming more destructive due to changes in wildfire behavior or in the development patterns of exposed communities. Here, we assessed trends in wildfire building exposure and destruction rates in the conterminous United States from 2002 to 2022. We mapped destroyed and surviving buildings within 100 m of all wildfires that destroyed 10 or more buildings (n = 362) and assessed trends relative to major ecoregions and vegetation types. We used logistic regression to assess relationships between destruction rates and landscape factors. We found that 10% of exposed buildings were destroyed in 2002–2012, but this percentage increased to 32% in 2013–2022. This increase was largely due to greater building exposure in evergreen forests in the northwestern United States, where exposed buildings were more than 3.4 times as likely to be destroyed as those in grass and shrublands. However, annual destruction rates also significantly increased in all other vegetation types and were correlated with development type, weather, and burn severity. These results indicate that increasing wildfire destruction in the United States has resulted not only from increased exposure but from rising rates of building destruction, potentially indicating more extreme wildfire behavior. This finding underscores the need to better understand how fuel management, community planning, and hardening buildings can reduce vulnerability.

As the realized experiences of wildfires threatening communities increase, the importance of proactive evacuation preparation and wildfire risk mitigation on private property to reduce the loss of lives and property is shaping wildfire policy and programs. To date, research has focused on pre-wildfire evacuation preparation and risk mitigation independently. This paper examines the substitutability or complementarity of these proactive risk-reducing actions. If mitigation and evacuation preparedness are substitutes, wildfire education programs may take a life-over-property approach. However, if proactive risk-reducing efforts are complements, wildfire education programs can confidently encourage residents to prepare for evacuation while also mitigating wildfire risk on their properties. This complementarity may also demonstrate that poorly mitigated households are less prepared to evacuate, compounding their risks. Using household survey data from 25 wildland-urban interface (WUI) communities across five Western states, we explore how wildfire risk mitigation actions affect evacuation preparedness. We find that improving household wildfire mitigation is associated with an improvement in wildfire evacuation preparedness. This complementary relationship between wildfire mitigation and evacuation preparedness actions highlights the potential benefits of a wildfire education approach that encourages residents to simultaneously prepare for evacuation and reduce wildfire risk on their properties before they are threatened by a wildfire.

Public land managers often conduct rehabilitation and restoration actions to achieve desired conditions or specific natural resource objectives. These "land treatments" include a variety of techniques, such as biomass removal or manipulation, seeding, and herbicide application. Limited information exists on the costs of conducting many common types of land treatments, but such information can be paired with treatment effectiveness data to prioritize application of limited resources where they may have the greatest benefit and improve efficiency. Here, we investigated cost information recorded in the Land Treatment Digital Library, a catalog of legacy land treatment information on public lands managed by the U.S. Department of the Interior's Bureau of Land Management. Based on 1,701 treatment records across eleven western U.S. states, we developed empirical per-acre cost estimates for representative land treatments in eight categories: three seeding categories (aerial seeding, drill seeding, and seedling planting), prescribed burning, soil disturbance, soil stabilization, vegetation disturbance, and weed control. We evaluated spatio-temporal factors that may be associated with variation in treatment costs and found strong evidence for nonlinear decreases in per-acre costs as treatment areas increased and that per-acre treatment costs have increased in real terms in recent decades. We also found evidence that per-acre costs for drill seeding, prescribed burns, and soil stabilization increased with the average slope of the terrain of a treated area and that per-acre costs for prescribed burns, seedling planting, and soil stabilization were influenced by distance to urban areas or major roads. These results can inform planning, prioritization, and assessment of common land treatments on public lands in the western United States, in particular supporting greater consideration of costs and cost effectiveness. (c) 2025 US Geological Survey Fort Collins Science Center. Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of The Society for Range Management.

Public agencies and organizations often deliver financial assistance through cost sharing, in which recipients contribute some portion toward total costs. However, cost sharing might raise equity concerns if it reduces participation among populations with lower incomes. Here, we revisit a past study using a richer dataset (n=1,689) to assess whether stated income levels affect survey respondents' willingness to participate in a cost share program for vegetation reduction to mitigate wildfire risk in western Colorado. Results show that residents with lower incomes are less likely to participate even though they can choose to contribute 0% toward a cost share. Residents reporting incomes less than $50,000 are 11 percentage points less likely to participate than those reporting incomes of $200,000 or more. They also are willing to pay a lower share (26 percentage points less) if they do participate. Results indicate potential economic equity concerns from the use of such programs.