WildfireRiskFinder

Smyer, TX

Smyer, TX's wildfire risk, in USFS's own numbers

Very High
85thpercentile nationally

Smyer sits at the 85th percentile nationally for wildfire risk to structures — in USFS's highest wildfire-risk band nationally — per USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities model, built from its 307 counted buildings, not vegetation cover alone. (Source: USFS's Wildfire Risk to Communities methodology.)

USFS's separate burn-probability score — fire likelihood alone, before counting what's built there — puts Smyer at the 84th percentile, close to its 85th-percentile risk score.

Where Smyer's buildings actually sit

307Total buildings
29.3%Direct exposure
70.7%Indirect exposure
0%Minimal exposure

Indirect exposure is dominant in Smyer (70.7% of 307 buildings): far enough from burnable vegetation to avoid flame contact, close enough for wind-blown embers. Only 29.3% sit in the Direct zone.

How Smyer compares

There's little gap between Smyer's 85th national percentile and its 73rd percentile inside Texas, which means the state comparison mostly confirms what the national score already shows. Among the 31,521 US communities USFS scores, Smyer ranks 4,803 for wildfire risk (1 is highest) and 21,455 by building count (1 is largest). Within Texas alone, it ranks 485 of 1,795 places by risk. See the full county-by-county picture for Texas on its state page.

Smyer and the insurance market

Smyer's very high rating (85th percentile) puts it among the places where the national carrier-pullback trend is most relevant — not a guarantee of a coverage problem, but a reason to shop rather than assume.

What would actually reduce this score

Because 70.7% of Smyer'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 Smyer's figures come from

The methodology guide shows exactly how USFS turned 307 counted buildings into the percentiles shown above for Smyer. The exposure-zones guide covers what Smyer's dominant indirect exposure actually means, with real examples from across the dataset.