Cecil, GA
Cecil, GA's wildfire risk, in USFS's own numbers
USFS scores Cecil at the 68th national percentile for wildfire risk to structures (well above the national norm for wildfire risk), a figure built from 243 real buildings rather than raw vegetation cover. (Source: USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities methodology.)
Fire likelihood alone (USFS's burn-probability figure) ranks Cecil at the 67th national percentile — 1 points below its risk-to-structures score, a gap driven by how much is actually built there.
Where Cecil's buildings actually sit
Of Cecil's 243 counted buildings, 64.2% carry Direct exposure and only 0% carry Minimal — a lopsided split that puts defensible-space clearing ahead of vents or roofing as the intervention worth doing first.
Cecil against the rest of the country
Cecil's risk sits at a similar level relative to Georgia (57th percentile statewide) as it does nationally (68th) — this place isn't unusual for its own state either way. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Cecil ranks 10,171 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 23,354 by building count (1 is largest). Within Georgia alone, it ranks 291 of 669 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Georgia on its state page.
What this risk score means for insurance
Cecil's 68th-percentile, high rating is the kind of score behind a broader national pattern: insurers pulling back from the highest wildfire-risk markets, non-renewing or declining new policies outright, most visibly in California. Shopping around, not assuming automatic renewal, tends to matter here.
Lowering exposure, not just insuring around it
With 64.2% of Cecil 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 Cecil's figures come from
The methodology guide shows exactly how USFS turned 243 counted buildings into the percentiles shown above for Cecil. The exposure-zones guide covers what Cecil's dominant direct exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.