Log In


Reset Password
News Education Local News Nation & World New Mexico

People underestimate wildfire risks

Less-effective mitigation techniques overvalued
A recent study highlights a disconnect between what people perceive as wildfire hazards and the perceptions of professionals working in the field. The University of Colorado, Boulder, study states people in fire-prone areas tend to overvalue less-effective mitigation techniques, ignoring more important steps that can be taken.

DENVER – A recent study suggests what fire officials and policymakers have always feared – people underestimate wildfire risks.

The study by the University of Colorado Boulder highlights that people are focused on mitigation in the wrong areas. For example, those living in areas prone to wildfires overestimate the importance of specific risk factors beyond their control, including the composition of vegetation, while ignoring things they can mitigate, including replacing combustible siding with more fire-resistant materials.

“A lot of natural-hazards research finds that people tend to overweigh things they have pretty limited control over. But they are downplaying the risk of things they can do something about, such as creating a ‘defensible space’ and what kind of siding they have,” said James Meldrum, the study’s lead author and a research associate in the environment and society program at CU’s Institute of Behavioral Science.

The study was conducted with assistance from the U.S. Forest Service, the U.S. Bureau of Land Management and the West Region Wildfire Council. Findings were published last month in the Risk Analysis journal, based on surveys of nearly 300 residents of Log Hill Village in Southwest Colorado’s Ouray County in 2012.

Researchers hope the study can assist policymakers and fire officials with educating communities on proper mitigation techniques, including creating financial incentives for certain mitigation work.

Ninety-three percent of people taking the survey answered “yes” when asked, “Are you concerned about wildfire risk affecting your current residence?” Yet, 50 percent of residents rated their properties as being “moderate risk,” while professionals rated 65 percent as being at “high risk.” Fifty-three percent underrated their wildfire risk relative to the professionals, and 18 percent over-rated risk.

Residents appeared misguided in their perception of risks associated with addressing visibility, deck and siding types, and distance to hazardous vegetation and other combustible hazards, including propane tanks, according to the study.

Professionals and residents, however, rated risk about the same for number of roads accessing a property and distance to problematic topography, such as a steep canyon or ridge. Yet, when it came to vegetation and driveway width, residents reported higher risk perception than the professionals, highlighting a disconnect.

“A lot of people do see the costs associated with doing the work themselves, and that stops them from doing it,” Meldrum said. “They might want to, but when push comes to shove, they don’t necessarily do it.”

pmarcus@durangoherald.com



Reader Comments