WildfireRiskFinder

Kopperl, TX

Kopperl wildfire risk explained

Very High
89thpercentile nationally

USFS scores Kopperl at the 89th national percentile for wildfire risk to structures (in USFS's highest wildfire-risk band nationally), a figure built from 185 real buildings rather than raw vegetation cover. (Source: USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities methodology.)

USFS's separate burn-probability score — fire likelihood alone, before counting what's built there — puts Kopperl at the 89th percentile, close to its 89th-percentile risk score.

Kopperl's building exposure, zone by zone

185Total buildings
48.7%Direct exposure
51.4%Indirect exposure
0%Minimal exposure

185 buildings are counted in Kopperl, and 51.4% of them are Indirect exposure — ember-driven risk rather than the 48.7% in Direct exposure or the 0% rated Minimal.

Where Kopperl ranks

There's little gap between Kopperl's 89th national percentile and its 82nd percentile inside Texas, which means the state comparison mostly confirms what the national score already shows. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Kopperl ranks 3,446 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 25,438 by building count (1 is largest). Within Texas alone, it ranks 317 of 1,795 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Texas on its state page.

Shopping for coverage in Kopperl

At the 89th percentile nationally, Kopperl 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.

Lowering exposure, not just insuring around it

Because 51.4% of Kopperl's buildings sit in the Indirect zone, sealing the ember pathway (vents, roofing, gutters) is the intervention this page's data actually supports — see the home-hardening guide.

Where Kopperl's figures come from

The methodology guide shows exactly how USFS turned 185 counted buildings into the percentiles shown above for Kopperl. The exposure-zones guide covers what Kopperl's dominant indirect exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.