WildfireRiskFinder

Hoagland, IN

Hoagland wildfire risk explained

Low
2ndpercentile nationally

USFS scores Hoagland at the 2nd national percentile for wildfire risk to structures (among the lower wildfire-risk places nationally), a figure built from 540 real buildings rather than raw vegetation cover. (Source: USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities methodology.)

Separately from the risk score above, Hoagland's burn probability — fire likelihood with no building count factored in — sits at the 2nd percentile nationally.

Hoagland's building exposure, zone by zone

540Total buildings
25.6%Direct exposure
0%Indirect exposure
74.4%Minimal exposure

Hoagland rates 74.4% Minimal exposure against just 25.6% Direct and 0% Indirect — of 540 buildings counted, few sit close enough to burnable vegetation for USFS to flag them individually.

How Hoagland compares

Hoagland's risk sits at a similar level relative to Indiana (13th percentile statewide) as it does nationally (2nd) — this place isn't unusual for its own state either way. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Hoagland ranks 30,945 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 16,718 by building count (1 is largest). Within Indiana alone, it ranks 842 of 967 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Indiana on its state page.

What this risk score means for insurance

Hoagland's low wildfire rating (2nd 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 74.4% of Hoagland 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 Hoagland's figures come from

The methodology guide shows exactly how USFS turned 540 counted buildings into the percentiles shown above for Hoagland. The exposure-zones guide covers what Hoagland's dominant minimal exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.