Hoskins, NE
How exposed is Hoskins to wildfire?
Out of every US place USFS scores, Hoskins lands at the 75th percentile for wildfire risk to structures — well above the national norm for wildfire risk — a figure built from its 204 buildings, not the land around them. (Source: USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities methodology.)
USFS's separate burn-probability score — fire likelihood alone, before counting what's built there — puts Hoskins at the 63rd percentile, lower than its 75th-percentile risk score, because so much is actually built here.
Hoskins's building exposure, zone by zone
USFS classifies 73% of Hoskins's buildings as Minimal exposure, the largest of the three zones here by a wide margin over 27% Direct and 0% Indirect — a landscape-level risk rather than a building-by-building one.
How Hoskins compares
Hoskins's risk sits at a similar level relative to Nebraska (77th percentile statewide) as it does nationally (75th) — this place isn't unusual for its own state either way. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Hoskins ranks 8,043 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 24,699 by building count (1 is largest). Within Nebraska alone, it ranks 139 of 583 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Nebraska on its state page.
Shopping for coverage in Hoskins
Hoskins's 75th-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
Hoskins's 73% Minimal-exposure share means structure-level hardening matters less here than it would elsewhere — still worth the low-cost basics, per the home-hardening guide.
Where Hoskins's figures come from
Every one of the two percentiles behind Hoskins's 8,043-place national rank traces to USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities dataset — see the methodology guide. The exposure-zones guide covers what Hoskins's dominant minimal exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.