Baxter, MN
Baxter wildfire risk explained
Baxter sits at the 65th percentile nationally for wildfire risk to structures — well above the national norm for wildfire risk — per USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities model, built from its 3,830 counted buildings, not vegetation cover alone. (Source: USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities methodology.)
USFS's separate burn-probability score — fire likelihood alone, before counting what's built there — puts Baxter at the 60th percentile, close to its 65th-percentile risk score.
What "at risk" means for the buildings here
76% of Baxter's 3,830 buildings sit in USFS's Direct exposure zone, roughly 2,912 structures close enough to burnable vegetation for flame contact, not just embers — 13.5% fall in the Indirect, ember-only zone and 10.4% are Minimal.
How Baxter compares
Within Minnesota, Baxter ranks higher (90th percentile) than it does nationally (65th) — one of the more fire-exposed places in a state that, overall, scores lower than that. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Baxter ranks 11,185 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 4,397 by building count (1 is largest). Within Minnesota alone, it ranks 95 of 914 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Minnesota on its state page.
Shopping for coverage in Baxter
At the 65th percentile nationally, Baxter carries the high rating that has pushed some carriers to limit new business in similarly-scored places elsewhere in the country. Worth comparing quotes rather than assuming last year's renewal terms still apply.
What would actually reduce this score
With 76% of Baxter in Direct exposure, defensible-space clearing and ember-resistant construction (vents, Class-A roofing) address the exposure this page's own numbers describe, not a generic checklist. See the home-hardening guide.
Where Baxter's figures come from
Every one of the two percentiles behind Baxter's 11,185-place national rank traces to USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities dataset — see the methodology guide. The exposure-zones guide covers what Baxter's dominant direct exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.