WildfireRiskFinder

Kooskia, ID

Kooskia wildfire risk explained

Very High
98thpercentile nationally

Out of every US place USFS scores, Kooskia lands at the 98th percentile for wildfire risk to structures — in USFS's highest wildfire-risk band nationally — a figure built from its 501 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 Kooskia at the 99th percentile, close to its 98th-percentile risk score.

Where Kooskia's buildings actually sit

501Total buildings
13.4%Direct exposure
86.6%Indirect exposure
0%Minimal exposure

USFS puts 86.6% of Kooskia's 501 buildings in the Indirect exposure zone, versus 13.4% Direct and 0% Minimal — a place where the fire doesn't need to reach the structure directly for embers to.

How Kooskia compares

Kooskia's risk sits at a similar level relative to Idaho (91st percentile statewide) as it does nationally (98th) — this place isn't unusual for its own state either way. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Kooskia ranks 569 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 17,328 by building count (1 is largest). Within Idaho alone, it ranks 21 of 232 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Idaho on its state page.

What this risk score means for insurance

At the 98th percentile nationally, Kooskia carries the very high rating that has pushed some carriers to limit new business in similarly-scored places elsewhere in the country. Worth comparing quotes rather than assuming last year's renewal terms still apply.

What would actually reduce this score

With ember exposure the dominant pattern in Kooskia (86.6% Indirect), vent screens and roofing material tend to matter more than lot clearing alone. The home-hardening guide covers both.

Where Kooskia's figures come from

The methodology guide shows exactly how USFS turned 501 counted buildings into the percentiles shown above for Kooskia. The exposure-zones guide covers what Kooskia's dominant indirect exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.