Quapaw, OK
Quapaw, OK's wildfire risk, in USFS's own numbers
USFS scores Quapaw at the 69th national percentile for wildfire risk to structures (well above the national norm for wildfire risk), a figure built from 598 real buildings rather than raw vegetation cover. (Source: USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities methodology.)
Fire likelihood alone (USFS's burn-probability figure) ranks Quapaw at the 71st national percentile — 1 points above its risk-to-structures score, a gap driven by how much is actually built there.
What "at risk" means for the buildings here
Most of Quapaw's buildings (81.9% of 598) fall outside USFS's Direct and Indirect zones entirely — that doesn't zero out the score above, it means the risk is regional, not structure-by-structure.
Where Quapaw ranks
Inside Oklahoma, Quapaw sits at just the 11th percentile even though it scores 69th nationally — the state's overall wildfire exposure is high enough to make this a relatively quiet corner of it. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Quapaw ranks 9,680 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 15,867 by building count (1 is largest). Within Oklahoma alone, it ranks 745 of 834 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Oklahoma on its state page.
Quapaw and the insurance market
Quapaw's 69th-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
Even with 81.9% of Quapaw 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 Quapaw's figures come from
The methodology guide shows exactly how USFS turned 598 counted buildings into the percentiles shown above for Quapaw. The exposure-zones guide covers what Quapaw's dominant minimal exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.