Farnhamville, IA
Farnhamville, IA's wildfire risk, in USFS's own numbers
Out of every US place USFS scores, Farnhamville lands at the 3rd percentile for wildfire risk to structures — among the lower wildfire-risk places nationally — a figure built from its 298 buildings, not the land around them. (Source: USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities methodology.)
Fire likelihood alone (USFS's burn-probability figure) ranks Farnhamville at the 2nd national percentile — 0 points below its risk-to-structures score, a gap driven by how much is actually built there.
What "at risk" means for the buildings here
Most of Farnhamville's buildings (88.3% of 298) 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.
Where Farnhamville ranks
Farnhamville scores 3rd nationally and 5th within Iowa — close enough that its state context doesn't change the picture the national number already gives. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Farnhamville ranks 30,636 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 21,680 by building count (1 is largest). Within Iowa alone, it ranks 965 of 1,017 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Iowa on its state page.
Farnhamville and the insurance market
Farnhamville's low wildfire rating (3rd percentile) isn't the kind of score driving the carrier pullback making news in the highest-risk Western markets — but a standard homeowners quote is still worth comparing on its own terms.
What would actually reduce this score
Even with 88.3% of Farnhamville 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 Farnhamville's figures come from
Every one of the two percentiles behind Farnhamville's 30,636-place national rank traces to USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities dataset — see the methodology guide. The exposure-zones guide covers what Farnhamville's dominant minimal exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.