Lovingston, VA
Lovingston, VA's wildfire risk, in USFS's own numbers
Out of every US place USFS scores, Lovingston lands at the 74th percentile for wildfire risk to structures — well above the national norm for wildfire risk — a figure built from its 347 buildings, not the land around them. (Source: USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities methodology.)
Fire likelihood alone (USFS's burn-probability figure) ranks Lovingston at the 73rd national percentile — 1 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
USFS classifies 54.5% of Lovingston's buildings as Direct exposure, higher than its 45.5% Indirect share and far above its 0% Minimal share — a profile where 189 structures sit close enough to vegetation that lot clearing matters most.
How Lovingston compares
There's little gap between Lovingston's 74th national percentile and its 88th percentile inside Virginia, which means the state comparison mostly confirms what the national score already shows. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Lovingston ranks 8,243 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 20,413 by building count (1 is largest). Within Virginia alone, it ranks 81 of 681 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Virginia on its state page.
Lovingston and the insurance market
Lovingston's 74th-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.
What would actually reduce this score
With 54.5% of Lovingston in Direct exposure, defensible-space clearing and ember-resistant construction (vents, Class-A roofing) address the exposure this page's own numbers describe, not a generic checklist. See the home-hardening guide.
Where Lovingston's figures come from
Lovingston's 74th-percentile score and its burn-probability figure both come from the same USFS workbook, documented in the methodology guide. The exposure-zones guide covers what Lovingston's dominant direct exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.