Ringgold, MD
Ringgold wildfire risk explained
Ringgold sits at the 23rd percentile nationally for wildfire risk to structures — close to the middle of USFS's national wildfire-risk range — per USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities model, built from its 122 counted buildings, not vegetation cover alone. (Source: USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities methodology.)
Fire likelihood alone (USFS's burn-probability figure) ranks Ringgold at the 23rd national percentile — 0 points above its risk-to-structures score, a gap driven by how much is actually built there.
Ringgold's building exposure, zone by zone
Direct exposure dominates in Ringgold: 63.1% of its 122 buildings, versus 36.9% Indirect and 0% Minimal. Clearing space around a structure changes the outcome here more than any single building-material swap.
Ringgold against the rest of the country
Ringgold's risk sits at a similar level relative to Maryland (31st percentile statewide) as it does nationally (23rd) — this place isn't unusual for its own state either way. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Ringgold ranks 24,391 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 28,065 by building count (1 is largest). Within Maryland alone, it ranks 362 of 527 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Maryland on its state page.
What this risk score means for insurance
Ringgold's moderate rating (23rd percentile nationally) sits outside the range where wildfire risk alone reshapes an insurance market — still, a homeowner here loses nothing by comparing rates.
Lowering exposure, not just insuring around it
Because Direct exposure dominates in Ringgold (63.1%), the highest-leverage fix is defensible space, not roofing or vents alone — covered in the home-hardening guide.
More on how this number was built
Ringgold's 23rd-percentile score and its burn-probability figure both come from the same USFS workbook, documented in the methodology guide. For more on what direct exposure implies beyond Ringgold, see the exposure-zones guide.