Siracusaville, LA
How exposed is Siracusaville to wildfire?
USFS scores Siracusaville at the 25th national percentile for wildfire risk to structures (close to the middle of USFS's national wildfire-risk range), a figure built from 457 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 Siracusaville at the 20th percentile, close to its 25th-percentile risk score.
What "at risk" means for the buildings here
Most of Siracusaville's buildings (95.4%) sit in the Indirect zone, where wind-blown embers rather than flame front are the mechanism USFS is scoring — ember-resistant vents and non-combustible roofing are the interventions this pattern favors, more than defensible space alone.
Siracusaville against the rest of the country
Siracusaville's risk sits at a similar level relative to Louisiana (25th percentile statewide) as it does nationally (25th) — this place isn't unusual for its own state either way. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Siracusaville ranks 23,793 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 18,127 by building count (1 is largest). Within Louisiana alone, it ranks 367 of 488 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Louisiana on its state page.
What this risk score means for insurance
Siracusaville's moderate rating (25th percentile nationally) sits outside the range where wildfire risk alone reshapes an insurance market — still, a homeowner here loses nothing by comparing rates.
Hardening a home in Siracusaville
Because 95.4% of Siracusaville'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 Siracusaville's figures come from
The methodology guide shows exactly how USFS turned 457 counted buildings into the percentiles shown above for Siracusaville. The exposure-zones guide covers what Siracusaville's dominant indirect exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.