Bird-in-Hand, PA
Bird-in-Hand wildfire risk explained
Out of every US place USFS scores, Bird-in-Hand lands at the 3rd percentile for wildfire risk to structures — among the lower wildfire-risk places nationally — a figure built from its 265 buildings, not the land around them. (Source: USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities methodology.)
Fire likelihood alone (USFS's burn-probability figure) ranks Bird-in-Hand at the 3rd national percentile — 0 points above its risk-to-structures score, a gap driven by how much is actually built there.
Bird-in-Hand's building exposure, zone by zone
Most of Bird-in-Hand's buildings (86.8% of 265) fall outside USFS's Direct and Indirect zones entirely — that doesn't zero out the score above, it means the risk is regional, not structure-by-structure.
Bird-in-Hand against the rest of the country
Bird-in-Hand scores 3rd nationally and 1st within Pennsylvania — close enough that its state context doesn't change the picture the national number already gives. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Bird-in-Hand ranks 30,716 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 22,678 by building count (1 is largest). Within Pennsylvania alone, it ranks 1,980 of 1,991 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Pennsylvania on its state page.
Bird-in-Hand and the insurance market
At the 3rd national percentile, Bird-in-Hand rates low for wildfire risk — well short of the threshold where insurers have been withdrawing coverage, though comparing a quote costs nothing either way.
What would actually reduce this score
Even with 86.8% of Bird-in-Hand outside USFS's Direct and Indirect zones, basic hardening — gutter maintenance, ember-resistant vents — is inexpensive relative to the regional burn-probability risk noted above. Details in the home-hardening guide.
Where Bird-in-Hand's figures come from
Bird-in-Hand's 3rd-percentile score and its burn-probability figure both come from the same USFS workbook, documented in the methodology guide. The exposure-zones guide covers what Bird-in-Hand's dominant minimal exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.