NIST Special Publication 1215

The Costs and Losses of Wildfires
A Literature Review

Douglas ThomasDavid Butry
Stanley Gilbert
David Webb
Juan Fung
This publication is available free of charge from:https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

NIST Special Publication 1215

The Costs and Losses of Wildfires
A Literature Survey
Douglas ThomasDavid Butry
Stanley Gilbert
David Webb
Juan Fung
Applied Economics Office
Engineering Laboratory

This publication is available free of charge from:https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

November 2017

U.S. Department of Commerce
Wilbur L. Ross, Jr., Secretary
National Institute of Standards and Technology
Walter Copan, NIST Director and Under Secretary of Commerce for Standards and Technology

Certain commercial entities, equipment, or materials may be identified in thisdocument in order to describe an experimental procedure or concept adequately.
Such identification is not intended to imply recommendation or endorsement by the
National Institute of Standards and Technology, nor is it intended to imply that theentities, materials, or equipment are necessarily the best available for the purpose.

Photo Credit: Lake City, Fla., May 15, 2007 -- The Florida Bugaboo Fire still rages out of control in somelocations. FEMA Photo by Mark Wolfe - May 14, 2007 - Location: Lake City, FL:
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/images/51316

National Institute of Standards and Technology Special Publication 1215
Natl. Inst. Stand. Technol. Spec. Publ. 1215, 72 pages (October 2017)
CODEN: NSPUE2This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Abstract

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

This report enumerates all possible costs of wildfire management and wildfire-related
losses. It, further, compiles estimates or proposes methods for estimating the costs andlosses identified. These estimates can be used for C+NVC (cost plus net value change)
modeling, and can also be used to produce an estimate of the ‘economic burden’ of
wildfire for the United States. The economic burden represents the impact wildfire hason the U.S. economy. Tracking the economic burden of wildfire could be used to assess
return-on-investment into wildfire interventions. The economic burden is decomposed
into: 1. intervention costs; 2. prevention/preparedness, mitigation, suppression, and crosscutting; 2. and into direct and indirect wildfire related (net) losses. The annualized
economic burden from wildfire is estimated to be between $71.1 billion to $347.8 billion($2016 US). Annualized costs are estimated to range from $7.6 billion to $62.8 billion.
Annualized losses are estimated to range from $63.5 billion to $285.0 billion.

iContents
Introduction: The Economics of Wildland/WUI Fire Management........................... 1
1.1. Wildfire Production (Net Damage) Functions ............................................................ 3
1.2. Purpose ........................................................................................................................ 7
1.3. Scope and Approach.................................................................................................... 7
The Costs Associated with Wildfires ........................................................................... 11This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

2.1. Preparedness.............................................................................................................. 112.2. Mitigation .................................................................................................................. 11
2.2.1. Fuels Management .............................................................................................. 11
2.2.2. Insurance ............................................................................................................. 13
2.2.3. Disaster Assistance.............................................................................................. 15
2.3. Suppression ............................................................................................................... 16
2.4. Cross-Cutting............................................................................................................. 17
2.4.1. Legal .................................................................................................................... 17
2.4.2. Science, Research, and Development.................................................................. 20
2.4.3. Regulations and Building Codes ......................................................................... 20
The Losses Associated with WUI Fires........................................................................ 23
3.1. Direct Losses ............................................................................................................. 23
3.1.1. Deaths.................................................................................................................. 23
3.1.2. Injuries and Health Impacts................................................................................. 25
3.1.3. Psychological Impacts......................................................................................... 27
3.1.4. Structure and Infrastructure................................................................................. 28
3.1.5. Environmental Impact ......................................................................................... 30
3.1.6. Timber and Agriculture Loss .............................................................................. 32
3.1.7. Agriculture Loss .................................................................................................. 33
3.2. Indirect Losses........................................................................................................... 33
3.2.1. General Economic Impacts ................................................................................. 33
3.2.2. Supply Chain Impacts ......................................................................................... 35
3.2.3. Evacuation Costs ................................................................................................. 35
3.2.4. Accelerated Economic Decline of Community................................................... 38
3.2.5. Utility, Transportation, and Government Service Interruption ........................... 39
3.2.6. Psychological Impacts from Lost Amenities....................................................... 39
3.2.7. Housing Market Impact....................................................................................... 40
3.2.8. Interference with Military Operations ................................................................. 41ii

3.2.9. Loss of Ecosystem Services ................................................................................ 42
3.2.10. Increased Risk of Other Hazards......................................................................... 43
3.2.11. Decreased Tax Base ............................................................................................ 43
3.2.12. Health and Environmental Impacts from Fire Retardants................................... 43
Estimation of Total Costs and Losses .......................................................................... 45
Gaps and Unknowns...................................................................................................... 51
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

iii

List of Figures
Figure 1.1: Donovan and Rideout C+NVC Model ................................................................... 2

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

List of Tables
Table 1.1: Summary of the Wildfire Damage Function Literature........................................... 5
Table 1.2: The Costs Associated with Wildfire Management by Responsible Stakeholder .... 8
Table 1.3: The Value Change (Net Losses) From Wildfire by Responsible Stakeholder ........ 9
Table 2.1: Estimated costs to convert different types of terrain to comply with FireWise
requirements are listed in Table 1. This table is modified from Stockmann, 2007 (Figure 15).
................................................................................................................................................. 14
Table 3.1: Hurricane Evacuation Costs ($1988)..................................................................... 36
Table 3.2: Situation 209 Data ................................................................................................. 38
Table 4.1: Costs Associated with WUI Fires.......................................................................... 46
Table 4.2: Losses Associated with WUI Fires........................................................................ 48
Table 4.3: Estimated Total WUI Costs and Losses ($2016)................................................... 50
Table 5.1: Magnitude of Cost/Loss and Uncertainty at National Level ................................. 52iv

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215v

Introduction: The Economics of Wildland/WUI Fire Management

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

The economics of wildfire, particularly the idea of efficient wildfire management, is not new.
Headley introduced the discussion of the effectiveness, efficiency, and waste of effort in relation
to fire suppression.1 Sparhawk presented his (graphical) economic ‘cost plus loss’ (C+L) model
depicting the tradeoff between primary protection (e.g., prevention and pre-fire suppression
expenditures), suppression cost, and wildfire losses.2 The C+L model illustrates that primary
protection expenditures can be chosen to minimize the sum of the primary protection
expenditures plus the ensuing ‘total liability’ (suppression costs plus wildfire losses) of wildfire
management. The minimum is optimal because for any other combination of primary protection
expenditures, more will be spent on management and/or lost to fire damage.
The C+L model has been revised several times (e.g., Gorte 2013 and Gorte, 1979).3, 4 Simard
recognizes that some impacts from wildfire can be beneficial (e.g., ecological benefits).5 The
modern C+L model has been since replaced by the ‘cost plus net value change’ or ‘C+NVC’model.6 Donovan and Rideout reformulate Sparhawk’s original C+L model to allow for bothprimary protection (‘presuppression’) and suppression to be independent inputs into the C+NVC
model.7 (Only primary protection is independent in the Sparhawk model.)Figure 1.1 depicts the Donovan and Rideout C+NVC model. For illustration purposes,
presuppression expenditures are held constant; thus, as suppression expenditures increase, NVC(net damage) falls. (Alternatively, the figure could be generated holding suppression constantand allowing presuppression to vary.) Summing presuppression, suppression, and NVC,
produces the C+NVC line. The minimum of the C+NVC line corresponds with the optimal levelof suppression (point A) – i.e., the level of suppression that minimizes the cost plus net valuechange (net damage) of wildland/WUI fire. Increases in spending on suppression beyond point
A (to the right) are not fully offset by the reduction in net damages. Decreases in spending
below point A (to the left) result in increases in net damages that exceed the savings insuppression.
While the graphical depiction of the C+NVC is useful for illustration, it is less so for identifying
the minimum C+NVC when presuppression expenditures are allowed to remain unconstrained.

Headley, R. 1916. “Fire Suppression District 5.” USDA Forest Service. Washington, DC. 58 pages.
Sparhawk, W.N. 1925. “The Use of Liability Ratings in Planning Forest Fire Protection.” Journal of Agricultural
Research 30(8):693-792.
3
Gorte, Ross. 2013. “The Rising Cost of Wildfire Protection,” Headwater Economics.
4
Gorte, J.K., and R.W. Gorte. 1979. “Application of Economic Techniques to Fire Management—A Status Review
and Evaluation.” USDA Forest Service Technical Report. INT-53. 26 pages.
5
Simard, A.J. 1976. “Wildland Fire Management: The Econoimcs of Policy Alternatives.” Canadian Forest Service
Technical Report 15. Ottawa, Ontario. 52 pages.
6
Rideout, D.B., and P.N. Omi. 1990. “Alternative Expressions for the Economic Theory of Forest Fire
Management.” Forest Science 36(3): 614-624.
7
Rideout, D.B., and P.N. Omi. 1990. “Alternative Expressions for the Economic Theory of Forest Fire
Management.” Forest Science 36(3): 614-624.
121

Mathematically, the C+NVC model, adapted from Donovan and Rideout,8 can be written as:
Equation 1
𝐼

𝐽𝐾

𝑀𝐼𝑁: 𝐶 + 𝑁𝑉𝐶 = ∑ ∑ ∑ 𝑤𝑖𝑝 𝑝𝑖 + 𝑤𝑗𝑠 𝑠𝑗 + 𝑓𝑘 (𝑝𝑖 , 𝑠𝑗 )𝑖=1 𝑗=1 𝑘=1

Costs $

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

where the w’s are unit prices, p is presuppression, s is suppression, i indexes presuppression
activities, j indexes suppression activities, and f() is the set of k net value change (net damage)functions, which depend on presuppression and suppression.

Presuppression

Suppression

NVC

A

C+NVC

Suppression $Figure 1.1: Donovan and Rideout C+NVC Model
The first-order conditions to minimize C+NVC are:Equation 2
𝜕𝑓𝑘 (𝑝𝑖 , 𝑠𝑗 )𝜕(𝐶 + 𝑁𝑉𝐶 )= 𝑤𝑖𝑝 +
= 0,
𝜕𝑝𝑖
𝜕𝑝𝑖

Donovan, G.H., and D.B. Rideout. 2003. “A Reformulation of the Cost Plus Net Value Change (C+NVC) Modelof Wildfire Economics.” Forest Science 49(2): 318-323.
8

2

and
𝜕𝑓𝑘 (𝑝𝑖 , 𝑠𝑗 )𝜕(𝐶 + 𝑁𝑉𝐶 )= 𝑤𝑖𝑠 +
= 0.
𝜕𝑠𝑖
𝜕𝑠𝑖
Therefore, optimality conditions imply:
Equation 3

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215−

𝜕𝑓𝑘 (𝑝𝑖 , 𝑠𝑗 )= 𝑤𝑖𝑝 ,
𝜕𝑝𝑖−

𝜕𝑓𝑘 (𝑝𝑖 , 𝑠𝑗 )= 𝑤𝑖𝑠 .
𝜕𝑠andThus, C+NVC is minimized when the marginal benefit from reducing net damages fromwildfires equals the unit price (i.e., marginal cost) of intervention. Again, as was the case withthe graphical depiction, at the optimal level of intervention, any increase in intervention will not
be fully offset by additional avoided damages, while decreases result in damages in excess of theexpenditure savings.
Two challenges exist that make identification of the optimal levels of intervention difficult todetermine. First, an understanding of the functional relationship between fire interventions andthe resulting net damages is needed. Second, measuring all possible interventions, their unit
prices (costs), and the damages related to wildland/WUI fires is a significant effort, regardless ofscale (e.g., national, state, community). This latter concern is the primary focus of this report.
Another issue is the scale of analysis is not often discussed in the C+NVC literature. Sparhawk(1925) focuses on individual national forests. Although substantially more complex, the
C+NVC could be applied more broadly (e.g., United States). An advantage of a smaller scale
analysis is the lower data requirement. For a national forest or WUI community, thecomprehensive dataset required may be easier to obtain. However, representing the functional
relationship between costs and the net damages (NVC), for a specific area, might be difficult.
An advantage of a larger scale analysis is the availability of more data to parameterize the net
damage equation (f() above). A smaller scale analysis may also fail to account for spatial
externalities—impacts to third parties outside the analysis area. Methodologically, however, the
C+NVC model is appropriate for a variety of spatial scales.
1.1.

Wildfire Production (Net Damage) Functions

While not a focus of this report, there exists a relatively broad range of literature that has
examined the relationship between wildfire behavior and factors, including climate and weather,
topography, land use and land cover, socio-economics and demographics, fire weather indices,
fuel treatment, other wildland/WUI management interventions, law enforcement, and locational
characteristics (e.g., distance to road). Table 1.1 provides a summary of a sample of theliterature. The sample is not exhaustive; rather, it is meant to provide representation of the typesof studies previously undertaken.
3This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Based on Table 1.1, the majority of the literature is focused on understanding wildfire occurrence(e.g., likelihood of ignition – see Grala et al., 2012) and wildfire extent (e.g., acres burned – seeSyphard et al., 2008). A few have accounted for wildfire flame intensity (e.g., Mercer et al.,2007), wildfire burned area size distribution (e.g., Moreira et al., 2010), ignition density (e.g.,
Ganteaume and Long-Fournel, 2015), and structure loss (e.g., Ager et al., 2010). Very few
studies have considered economic, as opposed to physical, measures of loss. Prestemon et al.
(2008) and Hesseln et al. (2010) evaluated suppression costs and firefighting expenditures.
While not a loss function, but also included in Table 1.1, are examples of production functions
focused on fireline (suppression) production (e.g., Holmes and Calkin, 2013).
Across the literature, the study periods and study areas are varied. Few comparisons have been
made to assess the generalizability of findings, although some survey papers exist (e.g.,Thompson and Calkin, 2011). In terms of modeling the effect of wildfire management
interventions, fuel treatments are the most common (Fernandes and Botelho, 2003, provide an
overview of the literature), while studies focusing on suppression (e.g., Butry, 2009) andprevention (e.g, Abt et al., 2015) are fewer.

4

Table 1.1: Summary of the Wildfire Damage Function LiteratureThis publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Wildfire Measure
Occurrence

Study Area
US Bureau ofIndian Affairs
tribal units; 1996
to 2011

Study Type
Empirical

Occurrence, Extent

Ft. Benning, GA;
1982 to 2012

Empirical

Extent, flame length,
structure loss
OccurrenceBlue Mountains
province, OR
Carranglan,
Nueva, Ecija,
Philippines; 2002
to 2014
Galicia, Spain;2001 to 2010

Simulation

Mark Twain
National Forest,
MO; 1986 to
2002
Bariloche,
Argentina; 2002
to 2005
St. Johns River
Water
Management
District, FL; 1996
to 2001
San Carlos deBariloche,
Patagonia,
Argentina; 2001
to 2005
Administrative
Region of Ligura,
Italy and Alachua
Country, FL
Various

Empirical

Occurrence, extent

OccurrenceOccurrence

Flame intensityweighted extent

OccurrenceOccurrence, Extent

Intensity, extent,
damageOccurrence,reoccurrenceOccurrence density

OccurrenceOccurrence density
Occurrence

Portugal; 1981 to2010
South-easternFrance; 1960 to
2011
Mississippi; 1991
to 2005
Canada; 1980 to2006
United States;
2000 to 2006

Factors Examined
Prevention program,law enforcement,
weather, fire weather
indices, previous
wildfire activity
Fuel treatments, fire
weather index, previous
wildfire activity
Fuel treatments

SourceAbt et al., 2015

Empirical

Topography, weather,location, land coverAncog et al., 2016

Empirical

Weather, socioeconomic, land cover,forest protection
Topography, land
cover, weather,location, socioeconomic
Socio-economic

Barreal andLoureiro, 2015

Suppression, fueltreatment, weather, fire
weather indices, land
cover, previous wildfire
activity, ignition cause
Socio-economic, land
cover

Butry, 2009

Simulation

Land cover, previous
wildfire activity

D’Andrea et al.,2010

Literature
Review
Empirical

Fuel treatment

Fernandes andBotelho, 2003
Ferreira-Leite et al.,2016

Empirical

Empirical

Empirical

Empirical

Empirical
Empirical
Empirical

5

Topography, weather,socio-economic, landcoverSocio-economic, land
cover, topography,
weather
Socio-economic,
location
Location
Land cover, weather,
topography, socioeconomic

Addington et al.,
2015.
Ager et al., 2010

Brosofske et al.,2007

Bühler, et al., 2013

Curth et al., 2012

Ganteaume andLong-Fournel, 2015
Grala et al., 2017
Gralewicz et al.,2012
Hawbaker et al.,2013

Suppression costs,
firefighting
expenditures, extent,
fire duration
Fireline

Northern Rocky
Mountains; 2000
to 2003

Empirical

United States;
2008
United States;2010 to 2011

Empirical

Non-specific
Flame intensityweighted extent, extent

Non-specificVolusia County,
FL; 1981 to 2001

Theoretical
Empirical,
Simulation

Occurrence, flame
intensity-weighted
extent, extent

Florida; 1981 to
2001

Empirical

Various

VariousSize distribution

Portugal; 2001 to
2003
Western UnitedStates; 1980 to
2004
Various
Locations,
Florida; 1994 to
2001

Literature
Review
Empirical

Fireline

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

OccurrenceOccurrence

Empirical

Empirical

Empirical

Thompson andCalkin, 2011
Wei et al., 2008

Simulation

Land cover,topography, location,
demographic

Santa Monica
Mountains, CA;
1925 to 2003
Various

Empirical

ExtentPreisler andWesterling, 2007

Various

Empirical

Southern Sierra,CA
OzarksHighlands, MO

Miller and Ager,2013
Moreira et al., 2010

Literature
Review
Simulation

United States;
1997 to 2006
Southeastern
United States;
1992 to 2010
California; 1960
to 2000

ExtentMercer and
Prestemon, 2005

Syphard et al., 2007

Suppression costs

VariousMendes, 2010
Mercer et al., 2007

Socio-economic, land
cover, previous wildfire
activity
Topography, location,
weather, land cover

Empirical

Occurrence

Holmes and Calkin,2013
Katuwal et al., 2016

Prestemon andButry, 2005

Florida; 1995 to1999

Occurrence, extent

Land cover,demographics
Weather, climate, fire
weather indicesHesseln et al., 2010

Law enforcement,socio-economic,
previous wildfire
activity, fuel treatment,
fire weather indices
Previous wildfire
activity, fuel treatment,
timber removal,
climate, socioeconomic
Climate, fire weather
indices
Weather, land cover,socio-economic

ExtentExtentSuppression, geospatial
technology,
topography, wildfire
factors
Suppression input,
weather, fire factors
Suppression input,
weather, fire factors,
previous wildfire
activity, land cover
Suppression
Fuel treatment,
previous wildfire
activity, timberremoval, socioeconomic, climate
Fuel treatment,
previous wildfire
activity, socioeconomic, climate
Various

Empirical

Empirical

6

Fuel treatment

Prestemon et al.,2002

Prestemon et al.,2008
Prestemon et al.,
2016

Syphard et al., 2008

Yang et al., 2008

1.2.

PurposeThe purpose of this report is to enumerate all possible costs of wildfire management andwildfire-related losses. The report compiles estimates or propose methods for estimating costs
and losses to produce an accounting that can 1) be used for C+NVC modeling and 2) produce anestimate of the ‘economic burden’ of wildfire for the United States.9 The economic burden
represents the impact wildfire has on the U.S. economy. Tracking the economic burden of
wildfire could be used to assess the return-on-investment into wildfire interventions.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

1.3.

Scope and Approach

The categories of costs and (net) losses from wildfire are shown in Table 1.2 and Table 1.3
below. Costs are categorized into 1. Prevention, 2. Mitigation, 3. Suppression, and 4. CrossCutting (i.e., those categories that fit within multiple categories). Losses are categorized into 1.
Direct and 2. Indirect categories. The costs and losses are mapped to the responsible
stakeholders who bear the economic burden. The stakeholders are separated into: 1.
Homeowners, 2. Government/Tax-Payers, 3. Citizens/Consumers/Occupants, 4.
Firefighters, and 5. Fire Departments, 6. Local Business Owners, 7. Suppliers, Local
Employees, and 8. Standards and Code Organizations. Of course, these stakeholder groups
are not mutually exclusive. For example, a homeowner might also be a tax payer and building
occupant.
Table 1.2 and Table 1.3 were the basis for a literature and data survey. The findings of those aresummarized in Sections 2 and 3. These sections present what is known along with the values
that are currently still unknown. Section 4 summarizes the total costs and losses. Section 5summarizes the current data gaps and unknown values.

Throughout this report, the term ‘wildfire’ is used generally to include both wildland and wildland-urban interface(WUI) fires, unless otherwise noted.
97

Table 1.2: The Costs Associated with Wildfire Management by Responsible Stakeholder
Who Bears the Cost?

Homeowners

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Gov't /
Tax
payersCitizens/
Consumers/
Occupants

Firefighters
and Fire
Department

Local
Business
OwnersSuppliers

Local
Employees

Standard andCodeOrganizations

Costs
Prevention
Education & Trainingx

Detectionx

Enforcement / Policing / Patroling / Permitting / Inspectionsx

Equipment (e.g., Spark Arrestor, Child-Proof Lighter)

x

x

x
x

x
x

x

x

Mitigation
Fuels Managementx

Fuel treatments (Rx fire, thinnings)
Defensible Space / Firewisexxx

Environmental Impact (Smoke, Landscape modification)
Insurancexxx

Disaster Assistancex

Suppression
Fire Departments (Labor, Equipment, Training)xFederal

x

x

State

x

x

Municipal (Professional)xx

Rural (Volunteer)xx

Cross-Cutting
Legal
Prosecutionx

Incarceration
Civil / Liabilityxxx

Science / Research & Developmentxx

Building Codes & Standardsxx

Regulations (e.g., Zoning)

x

x

8

x
x

x
x

x

x

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Table 1.3: The Value Change (Net Losses) From Wildfire by Responsible Stakeholder
Who Bears the Cost?

Homeowners

Gov't /
Tax
payersCitizens/
Consumers/
Occupants

Firefighters
and Fire
Department

x

x

x

x

Local
Business
OwnersSuppliers

Local
Employeesxx

LossesDirectDeaths and Injuries (Civilian and Firefighter)
Psychological Impacts (PTSD)
Structure and Infrastructure Loss

x

x

x

Environmental impactxx

Habitat & Wildlife loss

x

x

x

Timber Lossxx

Agriculture Lossxx

Remediation/cleanupxIndirect
General Economic Impacts (Business Interruption, Tourism, Supply Chain)

x

x

x

x

x

x

Accelerated Economic Decline of Communityx

Utility and Pipeline Interruption (Elec, Gas, Water, Oil)

Evacuation Costs

x

Transportation interruption (e.g., Roads and Rail)
Government Service Interruption (inc. Education)x

Psychological Impacts (Loss of Natural Amenities)x

Housing Market Impact (Loss Due to Fire Risk)

x

x
x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

x

Interference with military operations

x

Loss of Ecosystem Services (e.g., Watershed/Water Service)xx

Increased Risk of Other Hazards (e.g., mudslide, invasive species)

x

x

x

Decrease in Tax Base (Structure Loss or Decline in Value of Structure)x

Decrease in Government Servicesx
Health/Environmental Impacts from Use of Fire Retardants / Suppressants

x

x

x

x

x

9

x

x

x

Standard andCodeOrganizations

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

10

The Costs Associated with Wildfires

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Wildfires occurring near urban areas threaten lives and property. The risk that they pose
spurs communities to prevent or reduce the resulting damage. This chapter discusses thecosts of the actions taken to reduce losses and health impacts of wildfires. It discusses
prevention, mitigation, suppression and costs that cut across a number of categories.
Prevention includes items such as education and detection while mitigation includes
items such as fuels management and disaster assistance. The cross-cutting category
includes several items, including legal costs, research, building codes, and regulations.
Each section has a subsection labeled “Unknown” that discusses what is unknown about
this cost/loss. Some cost categories have more details available than others; therefore,
more discussion is warranted. For example, preparedness has limited data available, so
only a short section is devoted to it. Mitigation has much more information available, so
there are multiple subsections within the mitigation section.
2.1.

Preparedness

At the federal level, prevention and mitigation activities, including wildfire detection andeducation, are aggregated together in budget line items as ‘preparedness.’ Preparedness is
considered to be “any activity that leads to a safe, efficient, and cost-effective fire
management program, and includes the range of tasks necessary to build, sustain, andimprove the capability to protect against, respond to, and recover from domestic
incidents.”10 In FY2015, preparedness spending exceeded $1.4 billion dollars, split
between US Forest Service (78 %) and the Department of Interior (22 %).11
Preparedness does not include hazardous fuels management.
Unknown: The data on preparedness is not complete; thus, the total cost is unknown.
Estimates similar to those at the federal level are not available for state and local
governmental agencies.
2.2.

Mitigation

Mitigation is the action of reducing the severity of the impact from a fire. For wildfires,
mitigation actions include fuels management, insurance, and disaster assistance. The
following sections discuss the costs associated with mitigation.
2.2.1. Fuels Management
Fuels management includes two different sets of costs. The first cost is theimplementation of defensible space, an area around a structure designed to reduce fire

Hoover, Katie and Kelsi Bracmort. 2015. “Wildfire Management: Federal Funding and Related
Statistics,” Congressional Research Service, R43077.
11
Ibid
10

11

ignition and spread. The second is in-forest fuels management, including controlledburns.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

There is a growing body of literature looking at qualitative factors that impact whether
people engage in defensible space behaviors. Much of the literature is aimed at
identifying who implements defensible space measures and understanding the barriers to
implementing them. Several studies12,13,14 survey residents along the front range inColorado and ask whether they have implemented defensible space measures, theirintentions to do so, and barriers to implementing such measures. They found that amajority of survey respondents had implemented the measures and the most commonly
cited barrier to implementation was cost. However, a few listed aesthetics as a barrier as
well: in one study15 some 11 % thought that defensible space measures would make theirproperty look worse; some 20 % considered aesthetics to be either a moderate or extreme
barrier to implementing defensible space measures; and 26 % felt that privacy
considerations were either a moderate or extreme barrier.
A similar effort in Oregon16 attempted to identify the extent to which beliefs in climatechange affect participation in defensible space behaviors. That study found that “ thebelief that climate change caused wildfires made one more likely to participate in Firewise
behaviors, and the relationship between beliefs and behaviors was partially mediated by risk
perception.”
McCaffrey17 in her review of the literature found that typically a majority of people
surveyed in the WUI had implemented defensible space measures. The notable exception
to that was California which was the only state with active defensible space ordinances
and where the participation rate was 91 %. She observed that beliefs about effectivenesswere strong predictors of participation. She also observed a strong association between
familiarity and acceptance, an association she interpreted as causal.
The only study that estimated the costs of defensible space mitigation measures looked at
the cost-effectiveness of mitigation measures at the foot of the Bitterroot Mountains in

Absher, James D., Jerry J. Vaske, and Katie M. Lyon. 2013 “Overcoming Barriers to Firewise Actions by
Residents. Final Report to Joint Fire Science Program,” http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/44796.
13
Absher, James D., Jerry J. Vaske, and Lori B. Shelby. 2010. Residents’ Responses to Wildland Fire
Programs: A Review of Cognitive and Behavioral Studies. DIANE Publishing.
14
Kyle, Gerard T., Gene L. Theodori, James D. Absher, and Jinhee. 2010. “The Influence of Home andCommunity Attachment on Firewise Behavior.” Society & Natural Resources. 23(11): 1075-1092.
15
Absher, James D., Jerry J. Vaske, and Katie M. Lyon. 2013. “Overcoming Barriers to Firewise Actions
by Residents. Final Report to Joint Fire Science Program.” http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/44796.
16
Wolters, Erika Allen, Brent S. Steel, Daniel Weston, and Mark Brunson. 2017 “Determinants ofResidential Firewise Behaviors in Central Oregon.” The Social Science Journal. 54(2): 168-178.
17
McCaffrey, Sarah. “Crucial Factors Influencing Public Acceptance of Fuels Treatments.” 2009.
http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/download/36075.pdf.
1212

Montana.18,19 That study estimated the costs of a variety of mitigation measures “inconsultation with fire hazard reduction professionals local to the study area.” Thomas andButry estimate for the 2001 to 2010 decade that there were on average 3.2 million
residential structures at risk of wildfire annually.20 Assuming that each of these structures
required 0.366 acres of defensible space (the average lot size for a new home21); that
91 % of the structures have implemented defensible space, as seen in California; and that
Montana estimates apply nationally, the cost would be between $1.7 billion and $53.3
billion to comply with FireWise.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Cost estimates to convert different terrains are listed in Table 2.1. At the federal level, US
Forest Service and the Department of Interior spent $532.3 million on hazardous fueltreatments in FY2015.22 Over 83 000 prescribed fires treated four million acres in2015.23
Unknown: It is not known to what extent these estimates for Western Montana areapplicable to the rest of the WUI. It is also not known how much land of each type must
be modified each year.
2.2.2. Insurance
The cost of insurance has typically been calculated as the difference between premiums
paid in and claims paid out.24 Insurance is a system where funds are pooled to pay for thelosses that occur among the insured. The cost of insurance, that is, the amount not paidback to the insured, is the overhead costs. That would include employees’ wages,
underwriting expenses, administrative expenses, taxes, real-estate expenses, legal
expenses, and cost of capital.
Supply for insurance is determined by the amount of reserves that insurance providers
have—the reserves ensure that the insurance providers have the resources available tocover any claims that may be received. The levels of reserves required for a given levelof supply will depend on the variability in the amount of claims. Insurance lines with low
variance will require fewer reserves than insurance lines with high variance. In particular,

Stockmann, Keith. 2007. “A Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Preventative Mitigation Options for
Wildland Urban Interface Homes Threatened by Wildfire.” Graduate Student Theses, Dissertations, &Professional Papers. http://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/260.
19
Stockmann, Keith, James Burchfield, Dave Calkin, and Tyron Venn. 2010. “Guiding Preventative
Wildland Fire Mitigation Policy and Decisions with an Economic Modeling System.” Forest Policy andEconomics. 12(2): 147-154.
20
Thomas, Douglas and David Butry. 2014 “Areas of the US Wildland-Urban Interface Threatened by
Wildfire During the 2001-2010 Decade.” Natural Hazards. 71(3): 1561-1585.
21
US Census Bureau. Characteristics of New Single-Family Houses Sold. 2017.
https://www.census.gov/construction/chars/pdf/soldlotsize.pdf
22
Hoover, Katie and Kelsi Bracmort. “Wildfire Management: Federal Funding and Related Statistics,”
2015. Congressional Research Service, R43077.
23
National Interagency Fire Center. “Prescribed Fires and Acres by Agency.”
https://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/fireInfo_stats_prescribed.html. Accessed 10 July 2017.
24
Hall, John R. The Total Cost of Fire in the United States. National Fire Protection Association. 2014.
18

13

Table 2.1: Estimated costs to convert different types of terrain to comply with FireWise
requirements are listed in Table 1. This table is modified from Stockmann, 2007 (Figure
15).

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Surface Litter
Short Grass
Medium Grass
Tall Grass
Shrubs (0-5)
Shrubs (5-20)
Shrubs (20+)
Underbrush
Trees (0-20)(1)
Trees (0-20) Multiple
Trees (21-40)(1)
Trees (21-40) Multiple
Trees (41-60)(1)
Trees (41-60) Multiple
Trees (61-80)(1)
Trees (61-80) Multiple
Trees (80+)(1)Trees (80+) Multiple
Wood Pile (chopped)
Wood Pile (bucked)
Wood Pile (logs)
Debris Pile$/16ft2$ 0.50$ 3.50$ 5.00$ 5.50$ 3.00$ 3.50$ 5.00$ 6.00$ 8.00$ 8.50$ 9.00$ 9.50$ 10.00$ 10.50$ 11.00$ 11.50$ 15.00$ 16.00$ 4.00$ 3.00$ 10.00$ 1.50cells/acre2722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.52722.5$/acre$ 1,361.25$ 9,528.75$ 13,612.50$ 14,973.75$ 8,167.50$ 9,528.75$ 13,612.50$ 16,335.00$ 21,780.00$ 23,141.25$ 24,502.50$ 25,863.75$ 27,225.00$ 28,586.25$ 29,947.50$ 31,308.75$ 40,837.50$ 43,560.00$ 10,890.00$ 8,167.50$ 27,225.00$ 4,083.75$/100ft2$ 3.13$ 21.88$ 31.25$ 34.38$ 18.75$ 21.88$ 31.25$ 37.50$ 50.00$ 53.13$ 56.25$ 59.38$ 62.50$ 65.63$ 68.75$ 71.88$ 93.75$ 100.00$ 25.00$ 18.75$ 62.50$ 9.38insurance lines subject to occasional catastrophes will require much higher levels ofreserves than lines with more stable streams of claims.
For example, consider two hypothetical insurance lines. In the first line 10 % of theinsured exposure is paid out in claims every year. In the second line, nine years out of ten
no claims are paid, but one year out of ten 100 % of the insured exposure is paid out inclaims. The average claim paid per year for each insurance line is the same. But in thecase of the first line, the insurers must maintain sufficient reserves to be able to pay out
10 % of their exposure each year, while in the second case they must maintain sufficient
reserves to be able to pay out 100 % of their exposure in any given year.
Wildfire can result in catastrophes that significantly affect local populations. For
example, in California the number of structures destroyed in wildland fires between 2001
and 2015 range from 94 in 2010 to 5394 in 2003.25

25

California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2015 Wildfire Activity Statistics. 2016.

14

There are a number of insurance markets that are exposed to wildland fire. These include:
homeowners insurance, commercial insurance, automobile insurance,26 health and life
insurance. Regarding health and life insurance, there is a growing literature identifying
health effects from smoke from wildland fires.27, 28, 29, 30 The consensus of the literature isthat smoke from wildland fires has deleterious effects on the health of people exposed toit, but the severity of that effect is still not well understood.
Unknown: There are a number of unknowns involved with estimating the cost of
insuring against wildfire risk.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215•

It is not clear how much of the cost (and claims) for each policy line is
attributable to fire. Hall estimates that 21% of multiple-peril homeowners policies
are attributable to fire.31 No such estimates exist for other lines.

•

It is not clear how much of the cost of each policy is attributable to wildfire.

The main data source for aggregate information on the insurance industry is the National
Association of Insurance Commissioners. Two sources used here are the “Dwelling Fire,
Homeowners Owner-Occupied, and Homeowners Tenant and Condominium/Cooperative
Unit Owner’s Insurance Report32 and the Statistical Compilation of Annual Statement
Information for Property/Casualty Insurance Companies.33
2.2.3. Disaster Assistance
In November of 2016, a wildfire broke out in the Great Smoky Mountain National Park,
Tennessee. This fire killed 14 people and destroyed 2400 homes.34 This wildfire, likemany others, resulted in a disaster declaration by the president35, which resulted in the
disbursement of taxpayer funds to residents and businesses for recovery efforts. When26

Ibid
Henderson, Sarah B., and Fay H. Johnston. 2012. “Measures of Forest Fire Smoke Exposure and Their
Associations with Respiratory Health Outcomes:” Current Opinion in Allergy and Clinical Immunology
12(3): 221–27. doi:10.1097/ACI.0b013e328353351f.
28
Kochi, Ikuho, et al. 2012. “Valuing Mortality Impacts of Smoke Exposure from Major Southern
California Wildfires.” Journal of Forest Economics 18(1): 61–75.
29
Kochi, Ikuho, et al. 2010. “The Economic Cost of Adverse Health Effects from Wildfire-Smoke
Exposure: A Review.” International Journal of Wildland Fire. 19(7): 803. doi:10.1071/WF09077.
30
Richardson, L. A., P. A. Champ, and J. B. Loomis. 2012. “The Hidden Cost of Wildfires: Economic
Valuation of Health Effects of Wildfire Smoke Exposure in Southern California.” Journal of Forest
Economics. 18(1): 14–35.
31
Hall, John R. 2014 The Total Cost of Fire in the United States. National Fire Protection Association.
http://www.nfpa.org/news-and-research/fire-statistics-and-reports/fire-statistics/fires-in-the-us/overall-fireproblem/total-cost-of-fire32
National Association of Insurance Commissioners. 2017“Dwelling Fire, Homeowners Owner-Occupied,and Homeowners Tenant and Condominium/Cooperative Unit Owner’s Insurance Report: Data for 2014.”
33
National Association of Insurance Commissioners. “Statistical Compilation of Annual Statement
Information for Property/Casualty Insurance Companies in 2015.” 2017.
34
Satterfield, Jamie. 2016. “Teens toying with matches started Tennessee wildfire,” USA Today, Dec 9.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/12/09/sources-teens-toying-matches-startedtennessee-wildfire/95223326/
35
FEMA. “Tennessee Wildfires (DR-4293).” https://www.fema.gov/disaster/4293
27

15

estimating these costs, it is important to consider the possibility of double-counting. For
instance, FEMA disaster assistance can be used for several resilience-related items,
including: temporary housing, lodging expenses, repair, replacement, housing
construction, child care, medical expenses, household items, clean-up, fuel, vehicles,
moving expenses, and other necessary expenses determined by FEMA. Potentially, one
might double-count the costs and losses of a wildfire by adding losses and disasterassistance together.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

National disaster assistance costs can be ascertained from FEMA’s monthly report, which
is published on the 5th of each month. It provides predicted obligations and actual
obligations.36 The FEMA website also provides a searchable database of disasterdeclarations by year and disaster type.37 In 2016, there were 37 disaster declarations
related to fire with FEMA indicating that seven resulted in public assistance:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

California Blue Cut Fire $11 266.61
California Clayton Fire: $20 929.88
California Pilot Fire: $15 896.71
California Sand Fire: $13 825.73
California Erskine Fire: $185 295.00
California Border 3 Fire: $54 309.01
Kansas Anderson Creek Fire: $1 249 825.60

According to the FEMA values, a total of $1.551 million in public assistance was
disbursed for fire disaster declarations occurring in 2016. Note that funds can be
disbursed in years following a disaster.
Unknown: Despite the tracking of federal disaster declarations, there are some unknowns
regarding disaster assistance costs. State and local governments might also becontributing disaster assistance. At this time, these costs do not appear to be available inan aggregated form, making it difficult to estimate the total.
2.3.

Suppression

At the federal level, in FY2015, suppression spending exceeded $1.0 billion dollars, split
between US Forest Service (70 %) and the Department of Interior (30 %), with FLAME
account appropriations (i.e., wildfire suppression reserve accounts) adding another $383
million.38 The Federal Land Assistance, Management, and Enhancement Act of 2009
(FLAME Act) provides for emergency funding for wildfire suppression. 39 Related isFEMA. “Disaster Relief Fund: Monthly Report,” https://www.fema.gov/medialibrary/assets/documents/31789
37
FEMA. Disaster Declarations, https://www.fema.gov/disasters
38
Hoover, Katie and Kelsi Bracmort. 2015. “Wildfire Management: Federal Funding and Related
Statistics,” Congressional Research Service, R43077.
39
Forests and Rangelands. “The Federal Land Assistance, Management and Enhancement Act of 2009
Report to Congress.”
https://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/documents/reports/2_ReportToCongress03172011.pdf.
36

16

another $130 million in wildfire management accounts not explicitly labeled forsuppression, preparedness, fuel treatment, or rehabilitation purposes. State suppression
expenditures are estimated at $1 to $2 billion a year. 40

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

An estimate for local (municipal) fire departments is more difficult to determine. An
approximation can be calculated assuming the cost of wildfire prevention andsuppression is proportional to the incident volume of fire involving wildland fuels. In
2013, it is estimated that career fire department expenditures amounted to $41.9 billion,
and the value of volunteer (rural) fire departments is estimated at $94.9 billion.41 Basedon call volume (31.6 million calls) and on National Fire Incident Reporting System(NFIRS) data from 2013 (0.6 % of all calls), natural vegetation fires comprised 19 % of
all fire incidents. This yields an estimate of $2.1 billion after adjusting to 2016 dollars,
but it should be noted this would include suppression and preparedness-type activities.
Note that wildfires tend to occur in more rural areas, which may have a lower
participation rate for data reporting. This tendency may underestimate the number ofincidents involving wildfires when using NFIRS data.
Unknown: Although an estimate for suppression at the municipal level can be estimated,
the actual value is unknown.
2.4.

Cross-Cutting

There are several costs that cut across various organizations and categories. These
include legal costs, research, and regulations. The following sections discuss these costs.
2.4.1. Legal
The wildfire at Great Smoky Mountain National Park in 2016 was set by teens who werelatter charged with arson. 42 The prosecution and defense of individuals such as thesealong with the associated law enforcement, result in both individual and government
costs. If an individual is convicted, there can also be costs of incarceration. Additionally,
civil court cases for liability incur additional costs. The motivation for arsonists can
include profit (e.g., collecting insurance), crime concealment, revenge, vandalism, andeven job security for firefighters.
The Bureau of Justice Statistics has periodically published a special report on local jailinmates with the most recent one being from 2002.43 This data source provides estimateson the total number of jail inmates for arson offenses, including those convicted andunconvicted. In 2002, there were 342 372 convicted inmates of which 0.3 % wereGorte, Ross. 2013. “The Rising Cost of Wildfire Protection,” Headwater Economics.
Zhuang, J. et al. (Forthcoming). ‘Measurement of the Economic Impact of Fire.’ National Fire Protection
Association.
42
Satterfield, Jamie. 2016. “Teens toying with matches started Tennessee wildfire,” USA Today, Dec 9.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/12/09/sources-teens-toying-matches-startedtennessee-wildfire/95223326/
43
Doris J. James, “Profile of Jail Inmates,2002,” Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report, October 12,
2004, https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pji02.pdf
40
41

17

convicted of arson. An additional 178 035 inmates were unconvicted with 0.5 % being
charged with arson. This information can be combined with NFPA estimates on the
proportion of intentional fires that are outside fires (75 %)44 to approximate the numberof inmates being charged with or convicted of arson associated with wildlands.
Equation 4
𝑊𝐴𝐼𝐽 = 𝑃𝑂𝑢𝑡−𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑒 [(𝐼𝐽𝑎𝑖𝑙,𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣,15 ∗ 𝑃𝐽𝑎𝑖𝑙,𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣,𝐴𝑟𝑠,02 ) + (𝐼𝐽𝑎𝑖𝑙,𝑈𝑛𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣,15 ∗ 𝑃𝐽𝑎𝑖𝑙,𝑈𝑛𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣,𝐴𝑟𝑠,02 )]This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Where:𝑊𝐴𝐼𝐽 = Wildfire arsonists in jail𝑃𝑂𝑢𝑡−𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑒 = Proportion of arson fires that are outside from the NFPA𝐼𝐽𝑎𝑖𝑙,𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣,15 = Number of convicted jail inmates in 2015 from the Bureau of Justice
Statistics
𝑃𝐽𝑎𝑖𝑙,𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣,𝐴𝑟𝑠,02 = Proportion of convicted jail inmates that are convicted of arson in 2002
from the Bureau of Justice
𝐼𝐽𝑎𝑖𝑙,𝑈𝑛𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣,15 = Number of unconvicted jail inmates in 2015 from the Bureau of Justice
𝑃𝐽𝑎𝑖𝑙,𝑈𝑛𝑐𝑜𝑛𝑣,𝐴𝑟𝑠,02 = Proportion of unconvicted jail inmates that are being charged witharson in 2002 from the Bureau of JusticeThis is an estimate of the number of individuals in local jails for arson associated withwildfires and excludes those in state and federal prisons. Unfortunately, prison offense
data does not include a category for arson; therefore, some assumptions need to be madeto calculate an approximation. One can use the proportion of the jail population
associated with wildfire arson combined with prison population data to estimate theprison population associated with wildfire arson:
Equation 5
𝑊𝐴𝐼𝑃 =

𝑃𝐽𝑎𝑖𝑙,𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣,𝐴𝑟𝑠,02 ∗ 𝑃𝑂𝑢𝑡−𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑒∗ (𝑃𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑜𝑛,𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝,15 ∗ 𝐼𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑜𝑛,15 )𝑃𝐽𝑎𝑖𝑙,𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣,𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝,02

Where:
𝑊𝐴𝐼𝑃 = Wildfire arsonists in prison
𝑃𝐽𝑎𝑖𝑙,𝐶𝑜𝑛𝑣,𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝,02 = Proportion of convicted inmates that are convicted of property crimes
in 2002 from the Bureau of Justice
𝑃𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑜𝑛,𝑃𝑟𝑜𝑝,15 = Proportion of prisoners for property crimes in 2015 from the Bureau of
Justice
𝐼𝑃𝑟𝑖𝑠𝑜𝑛,15 = Number of prison inmates in 2015 from the Bureau of JusticePrison data is available from the Bureau of Justice Statistics with the most recent being
data for 2015.45 Using Equation 4, the total wildfire arsonists in jail is estimated to be
NFPA. 2014. “Intentional Fires,” April. http://www.nfpa.org/news-and-research/fire-statistics-andreports/fire-statistics/fire-causes/arson-and-juvenile-firesetting/intentional-fires
45
Carson, E. Ann and Elizabeth Anderson. 2016. “Prisoners in 2015,” Bureau of Justice Statistics,
December. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p15.pdf
4418

2212 individuals and, using Equation 5, the total number of individuals in prison for
wildfire arson is 2621. The prison estimate assumes that the proportion of wildfire
arsonists in jail is similar to the proportion of those in prison. There is likely some error
in making this assumption; however, it is the best estimate available at this time.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

The estimated number of those incarcerated can be multiplied by the cost per inmate. A
cost estimate is provided annually in the Federal Register or one could use an estimate
from another source such as the VERA Institute of Justice. The Federal Register
estimates that the average cost of incarceration for a federal inmate in fiscal year 2014
was $30 619.85 while the VERA Institute of Justice estimates an average of $31 286 forstate prisons. Using the Federal Register estimate and assuming that the cost of inmatesin jail pose the same cost, the total cost associated with wildfire arsonists adjusted to2016 dollars is $149.9 million.
In addition to the incarceration costs, there are also the legal costs, including legal
defense and judicial costs. The Bureau of Justice Statistics provides estimates on the
expenditures on public defenders and judicial costs.46 Combining these with estimatesfrom the Uniform Crime Reporting system for the number of arrests for arson, an
approximation can be made for the legal costs associated with arson:
Equation 6
𝐿𝑒𝑔𝑎𝑙 𝐷𝑒𝑓𝑒𝑛𝑠𝑒 = 𝐴𝑎𝑟𝑠 ∗ 𝑃𝑂𝑢𝑡−𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑒 (𝐸𝑃𝐷,𝑆𝐶)
𝐶𝑆𝐶

Where:
𝐴𝑎𝑟𝑠 = Number of arrests for arson in 2014 from the Uniform Crime Reporting system
𝐸𝑃𝐷,𝑆𝐶 = Expenditures for public defenders at the state and county level for 2007 from the
Bureau of Justice Statistics
𝐶𝑆𝐶 = Number of cases received by public defenders at the state and county level for2007 from the Bureau of Justice Statistics
Equation 7
𝐽𝑢𝑑𝑖𝑐𝑖𝑎𝑙 𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡𝑠 = 𝐴𝑎𝑟𝑠 ∗ 𝑃𝑂𝑢𝑡−𝐹𝑖𝑟𝑒 (

𝐸𝐽,𝑆
)
𝐶𝑆

Where:
𝐸𝐽,𝑆 = Expenditures for judicial costs at the state level for 2007 from the Bureau of
Justice Statistics
𝐶𝑆 = Number of cases received at the state level for 2007
Using Equation 6, the approximated cost of public of legal defense for those arrested forarson is $3.4 million after adjusting to 2016 dollars. This estimate is a lower boundestimate, as it assumes that all defendants use public defenders, which are, generally, less
46

Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2012. Census of Public Defender Offices, 2007. September. NCJ 228229.
https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/spdp07.pdf

19

expensive than a private lawyer. Using Equation 7, the associated judicial costs were$29.5 million after adjusting to 2016 dollars.
Unknown: The approximations of the cost discussed above utilize several assumptions
due to a lack of data. The actual number of wildfire arsonists in jail or prison are
unknown. Additionally, the forms of legal defense for arsonists and judicial costs are
unknown; however, making some assumptions allows for an approximation of the legal
and incarceration costs. Additionally, the estimates above do not take into account thecost of arresting an arsonist.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

2.4.2. Science, Research, and Development
Many public and non-profit organizations are involved in research and development to
reduce the costs and losses associated with wildland fires. These efforts, themselves, havecosts that should be considered for wildland fires.
The US Forest Service provides an estimate for research and development associatedwith wildland fire management. In fiscal year 2016, the USDA reports that approximately$19.8 million was spent on these items.47
Unknown: A number of other state and federal government entities along with
universities and colleges have expenditures related to wildland fire. Some of them may
specify these expenditures in their budgets; however, an aggregated estimate would
require substantial effort in collecting this data. In 2012-2013 there were an estimated7253 degree granting institutions in the United States with an unknown number of themhaving fire science programs conducting research on wildland fire.48
2.4.3. Regulations and Building Codes
Regulations and building codes have been developed at the local, state, and federal levels
to reduce the risk of damage to life and property. For instance, California law requires
homeowners to clear flammable vegetation within 30 feet of a building.
Unknown: There is no comprehensive list of regulations covering fire and wildland fire.
While building codes are compiled by the 50 states, there is no complete sense of which
portions are related to fire (and wildfire) and which are not. Nor is there any estimate of
how much of the costs of building codes are associated with fire (and wildfire)
protection.
Each state has its own building codes and fire regulations. Cost estimates are often
developed for the adoption of new regulations and building codes by states. Local

47

US Department of Agriculture. 2016. Fiscal Year 2017 Budget Overview. February. B-2.
https://www.fs.fed.us/sites/default/files/fy-2017-fs-budget-overview.pdf
48
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 2016. Digest of Education
Statistics, 2014 (NCES 2016-006), Chapter 2.

20

governments can also have their own building codes and regulations as well. In manycases these will not have cost estimates for their rules.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

21

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

22

The Losses Associated with WUI Fires
Despite the extensive efforts to prevent, suppress, and mitigate wildfires, they continue tocause damage to life and property. These damages include direct losses such as deaths,
injuries, and structure damage along with indirect damage such as business interruption,utility loss, and ecosystem impacts. This chapter discusses the various losses due towildland fires.
3.1.

Direct Losses

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Direct losses include those items that are lost as a direct result of a fire. For instance,
homes that are burned, civilians that are injured, and timber that is destroyed. The
following sections discuss these losses.
3.1.1. Deaths
Fire Exposure Related Deaths: The primary safety concern during a wildfire are thelives of the civilians in the fire’s path and the firefighters attempting to contain the fire.
Historically speaking, the civilian casualties due to wildfires have been relatively low. In
2012, an estimated 15 civilians died as a direct result of a wildfire,49 close to the averageof 13 people per year. Data on civilian mortality due specifically to WUI fires are notavailable, but treating WUI fires as a subset of wildfires that encroach on populated areas
would suggest that the 13 fatalities per year is a respectable initial estimate.
The rate of wildland firefighter deaths per year is higher, though not by much. From 1990
to 1998, 133 people died while involved in fighting wildfires.50 Of these deaths, 29 %were a result of burnover and 21 % were heart attacks. The largest cause of death wasvehicle related (23 % due to aircraft accidents, 19 % related to other vehicles). An
updated version of the report, which included data up to 2006, found a total of 310 deaths
over a 17-year period.51 The percentages of cause of death remained relatively constantwith the addition of the new data. The findings on cardiovascular mortality in firefighters
responding to a fire are well documented.
Smoke Exposure Related Deaths: The health effects of a wildfire are not confined
temporally or geographically to the fire event itself. Smoke from a fire can be carried
hundreds of miles away, and the effects of smoke exposure may persist well after the fire
has been extinguished. These impacts are not insignificant, nor are they simple toquantify. The effects of acute exposure to wildfire smoke is well studied, however studies
on chronic exposure are not well represented in the literature.
49

Thomas, Douglas S., and David T. Butry. 2012. "Wildland fires within municipal jurisdictions." Journalof Forestry 110(1): 34-41.
50
Mangan, Richard. 1999. "Wildland Fire Fatalities in the United States."
https://www.fs.fed.us/fire/safety/ref_material/content/fatalities.pdf
51
Mangan, Richard J. 2007. Wildland firefighter fatalities in the United States: 1990-2006. National
Wildfire Coordinating Group. https://www.fs.fed.us/td///pubs/pdfpubs/pdf07512814/pdf07512814dpi72.pdf

23

Wildfire smoke contains several chemicals that can possibly cause adverse health effects.
Particulate matter less than 2.5 micrometers (PM2.5) and less than 10 micrometers(PM10) are the most commonly researched components of smoke in the literature. Thesefine particles have been found to lead to an increased risk of cardiopulmonary and lungcancer related mortality.52 Rappold et al. found an excess relative risk of 66 % and 42 %for congestive asthma and congestive heart failure respectively.53 These values increased
to 85 % and 124 % respectively when incorporating socio-economic factors.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Johnston et al. estimated the global mortality from landscape fires using a chemicaltransport model coupled with satellite data.54 Using a figure provided in the document, anestimate for the United States can be bounded between 2940 and 21 095 people annually.
The wide range is a result of the bounds used in the heat map provided in Johnston et al;no point estimate was provided in the article.
The clear majority of articles on smoke exposure related deaths focus on individual fire
events. Individual fire examples are useful in providing evidence of the impact wildfire
smoke has on mortality rates, but they are not generalizable across the entire UnitedStates. For instance, Analitis et al. found that small forest fires had no impact onmortality, while medium and large fires increased the number of respiratory andcardiovascular related deaths.55 Analitis et al. noted that PM concentrations were notsufficient to completely explain their findings. These findings are aligned with what isfound in the literature survey of Liu et al, although they found that cardiovascular related
deaths had mixed evidence for a significant effect.56 This finding is corroborated by
Adetona et al.57 while Kochi et al. found that there were 133 excess deaths in the 2003
southern California wildfires due to cardiorespiratory causes.58
Other Causes of Mortality: While long-term effects of wildfires on civilian health are
not well-understood, some studies have attempted to determine what effects there may be
for firefighters. Although most literature focuses on all firefighters, or only urban
firefighters, the work of Liu et al. found that the respiratory effects for wildland
firefighters were similar to urban firefighters.59 Daniels et al. found an increased risk of52

Pope III, C. Arden, et al. 2002. "Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term exposure to fineparticulate air pollution." Jama 287(9): 1132-1141.
53
Rappold, Ana G., et al. 2012. "Cardio-respiratory outcomes associated with exposure to wildfire smoke
are modified by measures of community health." Environmental Health 11(71): 1-9.
54
Johnston, Fay H., et al. 2012. "Estimated global mortality attributable to smoke from landscape fires."
Environmental health perspectives 120(5): 695.
55
Analitis, Antonis, Ioannis Georgiadis, and Klea Katsouyanni. 2011. "Forest fires are associated withelevated mortality in a dense urban setting." Occupational and environmental medicine: oem-2010.
56
Liu, J.C., Pereira G., Uhl, S.A., Bravo, M.A., and Bell, M.L. 2015. A systematic review of the physicalhealth impacts from non-occupational exposure to wildfire smoke. Environmental Research 136: 120-132
57
Adetona, Olorunfemi, et al. 2016. "Review of the health effects of wildland fire smoke on wildland
firefighters and the public." Inhalation toxicology 28(3): 95-139.
58
Kochi, Ikuho, et al. 2012. "Valuing mortality impacts of smoke exposure from major southern California
wildfires." Journal of Forest Economics 18(1): 61-75.
59
Liu, Diane, et al. 1992. "The effect of smoke inhalation on lung function and airway responsiveness inwildland fire fighters." American Review of Respiratory Disease 146: 1469-1469.

24

respiratory and digestive cancers mortality. Excess malignant mesothelioma was also
reported, however exposure to asbestos is less common for wildland firefighters.60
Vehicle accidents are a prevalent cause, by percentage, of death for wildland firefighters
responding to a fire as well.61

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Economic Losses: The economic losses due to the deaths of civilians and firefighters
have not been adequately analyzed in the literature,62 however there are some national
estimates. An estimate for all firefighters (including wildfire) puts the number around$31.7 billion annually (excluding smoke exposure related deaths) assuming a $5 million
dollar value of a statistical life (VSL) and a $166 000 Value of a Statistical Injury (VSI).
Using a justifiable VSL, a very rough estimate of the overall mortality losses can beachieved for just wildland fires. There are additional considerations that arise fromfatalities (i.e., cost of emergency health care, impact of losing a firefighter on theeffectiveness of a fire department), but many of these are either difficult to quantify, orare better rolled into another loss category. Given the wide range of estimated deaths
derived from the heat map in Johnston et al., a point estimate should be checked against
actual estimates from a specific fire, the southern California wildfires of 2003, which had
an estimated $172.9 million to $1.729 billion dollars of economic losses due to wildfire
related mortality.63
Using the estimates of 15 civilians and 18 firefighters direct wildfires deaths, between
2940 and 21 095 indirect deaths, and a $9.6 million value of a statistical life, there is an
estimate of between $28.5 billion and $202.8 billion lost.
Unknown: Due to the nature of smoke related deaths, the long-term mortality due towildfire smoke is not well understood. Short-term effects can only be estimated based onmodeling or using hospital admissions.
3.1.2. Injuries and Health Impacts
Injuries: Injuries due to wildland fires are not uncommon. While firefighters experience
the bulk of them due to the hazards of their profession, civilians can also be injured.
These may be the result of attempting to flee the scene of the fire, car accidents during
evacuations, slips, trips, falls, and acute smoke inhalation, among other causes.
Injuries related directly to wildfires, other than smoke exposure, are relatively infrequent
when compared with urban fires. In 2012, 88 civilian injuries due to wildland fires were
60

Daniels, Robert D., et al. 2014. "Mortality and cancer incidence in a pooled cohort of US firefightersfrom San Francisco, Chicago and Philadelphia (1950–2009)." Occupational and Environmental Medicine.
71(6): 388-397.
61
Mangan, Richard. 1999 "Wildland Fire Fatalities in the United States."
https://www.fs.fed.us/fire/safety/ref_material/content/fatalities.pdf
62
Kochi, Ikuho, et al. 2010. "The economic cost of adverse health effects from wildfire-smoke exposure: areview." International Journal of Wildland Fire 19(7): 803-817.
63
Kochi, Ikuho, et al. 2012. "Valuing mortality impacts of smoke exposure from major southern California
wildfires." Journal of Forest Economics 18(1): 61-75.

25

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

reported,64 which is estimated using the National Fire Incident Reporting System(NFIRS). The same paper estimated the total cost due to fatalities and injuries in wildfires
as roughly $148 million. Estimates for the number of wildland firefighter injuries can beobtained from the Incident Management Situation Report system, which tracks data on
wildfires in federal jurisdictions. From 2003 to 2007, an average of roughly 260 injuries
per year were reported in such incidents.65 It may be possible to extrapolate this value tothe nation as a whole by utilizing the equivalent rate of injury per person-days (13.316
average over the selected years).66 Getting an estimate of total person-hours for a
responding wildland firefighters and using a viable value of statistical injury, a roughestimate can be obtained.
Smoke Exposure: Liu et al.67 found strong evidence (43 of 45 studies with statisticallysignificant results) for an increase in respiratory morbidity due to wildfires. Higher
instances of asthma attacks were commonly reported, along with coughing, wheezing,and other respiratory symptoms, as well as dispensation or use of medication. Liu et al.
found no studies that directly examined lags longer than 5 days between exposure andhospital admission day. Some cross-sectional studies did note increases in primary carevisits for a 12-week68 and a 5-week69 exposure period, although no conclusion onwhether these visits were because of acute short-term, or lower-level long-term exposure
was reached. Other effects that were found consistent in the literature survey of Liu et al.
are, ophthalmic related symptoms, rescue medication use, and asthma related symptoms.
Cardiovascular symptoms (six significant findings out of 14 studies) and birth weight(one significant finding out of two studies) showed inconsistent results in the literature.
Economic Losses: The economic impacts of smoke related health impacts can besubstantial. Most literature estimates include mortality, but the values give some sense ofscale to the total health impacts for individual fires. For the Chisolm fire in 2001, the total
health impacts were estimated to be around 12 137 043 dollars Canadian based onmonitoring station data and willingness to pay estimates.70 It is estimated that 95 % ofthis value was due to increased mortality risk.

64

Thomas, Douglas S., and David T. Butry. 2012 "Wildland fires within municipal jurisdictions." Journalof Forestry 110(1): 34-41.
65
Britton, Carla Lea. 2010. "Risk factors for injury among federal wildland firefighters in the UnitedStates."66
ibid
67
Liu, J.C., Pereira G., Uhl, S.A., Bravo, M.A., and Bell, M.L. 2015. A systematic review of the physicalhealth impacts from non-occupational exposure to wildfire smoke. Environmental Research 136: 120-132
68
Lee, T. S., Falter, K., Meyer, P., Mott, J., & Gwynn, C. 2009. Risk factors associated with clinic visits
during the 1999 forest fires near the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation, California, USA. International
journal of environmental health research, 19(5): 315-327.
69
Moore, D., Copes, R., Fisk, R., Joy, R., Chan, K., & Brauer, M. 2006. Population health effects of air
quality changes due to forest fires in British Columbia in 2003: estimates from physician-visit billing data.
Canadian Journal of Public Health/Revue Canadienne de Sante'e Publique, 105-108.
70
Rittmaster, R., et al. 2006. "Economic analysis of health effects from forest fires." Canadian Journal ofForest Research 36(4): 868-877.

26

In 2015, an estimated 30 000 firefighters were mobilized to contend with wildland fires. 71
This data can be combined with a study of respiratory and cardiovascular healthoutcomes72 that can be used to estimate the proportion of those exposed to smoke thathave adverse respiratory outcomes (estimated to be 29 %) along with a study thatexamines smoke related health costs73 (estimated to be $10 971 per treatment) to estimate
a cost of injuries due to smoke exposure:
Equation 8
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

𝑆𝐻𝐶 = 𝐸𝑥𝑝 ∗ 𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 ∗ 𝐴𝑣𝑔𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡
𝑆𝐻𝐶 = Smoke related health costs
𝐸𝑥𝑝 = Total number of exposed
𝑅𝑎𝑡𝑒 = Estimated proportion of those exposed that have adverse health effects.
𝐴𝑣𝑔𝐶𝑜𝑠𝑡 = Average cost of treating health impacts from smoke exposure
Combining this with the estimated 88 civilian injuries and the 260 firefighters multipliedby the value of a statistical injury ($189 000)74 and adjusting to 2016 dollars provides anestimate of $177.4 million in economic loss.
Unknown: Injuries that occur as a result of wildland fires are not tracked
comprehensively at the national level; however, national estimates can be made using
existing datasets. No national estimates of the health impacts of smoke exposure exist,
however using the estimate from Johnston et al. and an assumed VSI for the types of
injuries associated with smoke exposure, an initial estimate is possible.75 A more detailed
estimate is possible through attempting to separate out the costs of treatment for specificsmoke-related impacts and a literature-based distribution of health impacts.
3.1.3. Psychological Impacts
Exposure to a wildfire can have a traumatizing impact on civilians and firefighters.
Witnessing the physical destruction from a wildfire can present emotional and mental
hardships that may manifest in psychological disorders. Studies from wildfires havefound depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and other anxiety disorders to71

Mooney, Chris. 2015. With a stunning 7 million acres burned so far, the U.S. wildfire situation is looking
dire. The Washington Post. August 19.
72
Henderson, Sarah B. et al. 2011. “Three Measures of Forest Fire Smoke Exposure and their Associations
with Respiratory and Cardiovascular Health Outcomes in a Population-Based Cohort.” Environmental
Health Perspectives. 119: 1266-1271. https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1002288/
73
Jones, Benjamin et al. 2016. “Wildfire Smoke Health Costs: A Methods Case Study for a Southwestern
US ‘Mega-Fire’.” Joural of Environmental Economics and Policy. 5(2): 181-199.
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21606544.2015.1070765
74
Thomas, Douglas S., and David T. Butry. 2012 "Wildland fires within municipal jurisdictions." Journalof Forestry 110(1): 34-41.
75
Johnston, Fay H., et al. 2012. "Estimated global mortality attributable to smoke from landscape fires."
Environmental health perspectives 120(5): 695.

27

have resulted from exposure to wildfire events. The focus of the remainder of this section
is on PTSD, due to a greater amount of literature on its role post-wildfire.
Estimates for civilian rates of PTSD and other anxiety disorders after a disaster range
from 30 %76 to 60 %.77 These effects have been observed to last long after the fire, with
40 % showing signs up to 1.5 years after the event.78 Rates of PTSD among firefighters
range from 13 %79 to 20 %,80 with 20 % experiencing burnout81.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

A national estimate can be achieved by estimating the population of civilians andfirefighters exposed and using the rates form the literature to get a count of those
exposed. For firefighters, an estimate for the exposed population is achievable fromliterature. At one point in 2015, a total of 30 000 firefighters were mobilized to contend
with wildland fires.82 This was the highest reported number since 2000. Assuming that
this number represents the exposed firefighter population for a year, and assuming thatthe cost of PTSD treatment is $407583 based on estimates for military personnel, theestimated cost of PTSD for firefighters is roughly $24.5 million dollars.
Unknown: There are no national estimates for the civilian population exposed towildfires, and at what exposure level (e.g., smoke, flames, lost loved ones, lost house,etc.). Therefore, it is not possible to get a credible estimate of the civilian rate of PTSD.
Using PTSD also serves as a proxy for other disorders not as well developed in theliterature.
3.1.4. Structure and Infrastructure
Wildfires frequently move into communities and burn buildings and infrastructure. The
damage to these structures is tracked at varying degrees, but there is not a database thattracks this information comprehensively across the US.

Cole, Valerie. 2011. “PTSD and Natural Disasters, Defense Centers of Excellence for Psychological
Health and Traumatic Brain Injury.” DCoE. Webinar Aug. 25.
http://www.dcoe.mil/content/Navigation/Documents/Cole%20%20PTSD%20and%20Natural%20Disasters.
pdf
77
Kuligowski, Erica. 2016. "Burning down the silos: integrating new perspectives from the social sciences
into human behavior in fire research." Fire and Materials. Special Issue Paper. August 31.
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/fam.2392/pdf
78
ibid
79
Katsavouni, F., et al. 2015. "The relationship between burnout, PTSD symptoms and injuries infirefighters." Occupational medicine 66(1): 32-37.
80
Rahman, Fauzeya. 2016. New Study Estimates 20 Percent of Firefighters have PTSD. Houston
Chronical. Aug 17.
81
Katsavouni, F., et al. 2015. "The relationship between burnout, PTSD symptoms and injuries infirefighters." Occupational medicine 66(1): 32-37.
82
Mooney, Chris. 2015. With a stunning 7 million acres burned so far, the U.S. wildfire situation is looking
dire. The Washington Post. August 19.
83
Galea, Sandro, et al. 2012. "Treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder in military and veteran
populations: Initial assessment." Washington, DC: The National Academies.
76

28

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

The National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS), a product of the National Fire
Data Center which is at the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA), is broken into modules
with the Basic Module as the primary one. In this module, general information is
captured for every incident (emergency call). There are additional modules for different
types of incidents. There is a Fire Module, Structure Fire Module, Civilian Fire Casualty
Module, Fire Service Casualty Module, Wildland Fire Module, and an Arson Module.
Information is generally obtained at the scene by emergency responder personnel. Withineach module there are required fields and optional fields. This system records the types ofmaterials burned and whether structures were involved; however, it is a voluntary system
and not all fire departments participate. The overwhelming majority of departments that
do participate are municipal fire departments, meaning that departments in the wildland,such as those in the Forest Service, do not typically report data to this system. A paper by
Thomas and Butry used NFIRS data to estimate that between 2002 and 2006, an annual
average of 1248 structures were damaged at an estimated loss of $160.2 million.84 After
adjusting for inflation using the consumer price index from the Bureau of Labor
Statistics, the average per structure loss is $143 094.
In addition to the NFIRS data, the National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) generates
aggregated wildland fire data from forms filled out by wildland fire dispatch centers.
According to NIFC, a total of 4312 structures were destroyed by wildfires in 2016, but it
does not provide a dollar estimate of the losses. 85 Using the average per structure loss
calculated from the NFIRS data above, an estimated $617 million was lost in 2016 towildfires. Note that this estimate likely excludes many of the structures that occur inmunicipal jurisdictions since they are being reported by wildland fire dispatch centers.
There are additional databases that characterize wildfires; however, they tend to have anarrower scope geographically. For example, the California Department of Forestry andFire Protection (CALFIRE) maintains fire perimeter data along with the number ofstructures burned; however, the data is only for California. Federal land managers, suchas the Forest Service and Bureau of Land Management, also maintain databases, but only
for their jurisdictions. Additionally, data from these organizations is likely incorporated
in the NIFC data.
Unknown: There is not a comprehensive database tracking the number of structuresburned and/or the value of property damaged. The NIFC data primarily contains
information reported by wildland dispatch centers while the NFIRS data primarily
contains data from municipal jurisdictions. Potentially, the two together might provide anestimate near the true loss; however, it is unclear to what extent these datasets overlap.
There is not a known database that tracks the impact to infrastructure, such as powerlines, roads, and pipelines.

84

Thomas, Douglas S., and David T. Butry. 2012. "Wildland fires within municipal jurisdictions." Journalof Forestry 110(1): 34-41.
85
National Interagency Fire Center. 2016. Wildland Fire Summary and Statistics Annual Report.
https://www.predictiveservices.nifc.gov/intelligence/2016_Statssumm/intro_summary16.pdf

29

3.1.5. Environmental Impact
Wildfires are naturally occurring and play an important role in the life of a wildland area.
As such many of the environmental impacts are naturally recovered as the wildland area
returns to its pre-fire state. These impacts do have real costs in the immediate aftermathof a fire though and their effects can be exacerbated by human activity. Famously, trying
to completely prevent forest fires had a negative effect. By not having regular sweeps offire through forested areas, the underbrush grew to a point where the overabundance offuel resulted in far more damaging fires.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Vegetation Loss: The most noticeable effect of a WUI fire is the loss of vegetation.
Vegetation naturally returns on its own, however many parks actively work to reseed assoon as possible to help prevent future erosion. For instance, after the 1988 Yellowstone
wildfires it cost roughly $2190 per hectare to reseed 440 hectares of land.86 Using $2190
per hectare as a starting value and bringing it to present value dollars provides an initial
estimate for the cost to reseed forest lands, provided an accurate estimate of forest land
requiring reseeding per year can be found.
Unknown-Vegetation Loss: The acreage of land burned by vegetation type, which
would allow an estimate to be derived based on some basic assumptions of seed typeused and amount of seed per acre, is unknown.
Erosion: As mentioned, vegetation serves as a reliable way to prevent soil runoff. The
total amount of runoff after a fire is dependent on the rainstorm sequence. An intensestorm immediately after the fire will mobilize more soil than one after a substantial
period of regrowth. Geography and soil type also play a role. This variability makes thetotal effects of runoff highly variable by climate and topology.87 Grass seeding and straw
mulch are typically applied after a fire to reduce erosion, with evidence showing straw
mulch to be far more effective.88 One component of an upper bound of the national
estimate of soil erosion can be achieved by estimating the annual acreage burned andfinding the required amount of straw mulch required to reduce erosion effects. An
estimate of total erosion costs per year (including agricultural erosion) from Pimentel etal. puts the value at around $45 billion dollars.89 It should be noted that Pimentel et al.
deals primarily with agricultural erosion and includes wind erosion effects.
Unknown-Erosion: The percentage of erosion and runoff from wildfire effected lands,
which could be used to reduce the Pimentel et al. estimate to a national estimate for86

Wenny, Daniel G. et al. The Need to Quantify Ecosystem Services Provided By Birds. American
Ornithological Society.
87
Moody, John A., Deborah A. Martin, and Susan H. Cannon. 2008. "Post-wildfire erosion response in two
geologic terrains in the western USA." Geomorphology 95(3): 103-118.
88
Groen, Amy H., and Scott W. Woods. 2008. "Effectiveness of aerial seeding and straw mulch for
reducing post-wildfire erosion, north-western Montana, USA." International Journal of Wildland Fire
17(5): 559-571.
89
Pimentel, David, et al. 1995. "Environmental and economic costs of soil erosion and conservation
benefits." Science-AAAS-Weekly Paper Edition 267.5201: 1117-1122.

30

wildfire is unknown. Though not a true estimate given the extraneous types of erosion
included, it would serve as an effective upper bound.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Effects on watershed: In many cases, the runoff from a wildfire-cleared area may end up
in a waterway. This can produce negative effects for the aquatic ecosystem as well as forwater treatment plants and other human users of the watershed. The impacts on water
treatment can be estimated by developing a national average for the increase in turbidity
due to wildfire runoff and using a general rule like “a 0.25 % increase in chemical costfor each 1 % increase in turbidity.”90 The effect on the environment is more difficult toquantify. As noted in Benda et al., the nature of a disruptive event, such as a wildfire, as
well as the activities along the channel in question, may be a beneficial event or a
detrimental one.91
The lack of vegetation near a watershed can lead to increased water flow into channels,
potentially leading to greater downstream floods. A study by Neary et al. found that thewatershed impacts of a large burnt area can produce peak flows to 10 to 100 times thebaseflow for a watershed, with some being measured as high as 2300 times baseflow.92
Unfortunately, data on floods which can be attributed to post-fire effects are not well
documented, making valuation impossible.
Unknown-Watershed: The nature of the effects over the short-term, and long-term, areunknown and may be highly variable. Furthermore, the disruptive event may itself be a“restorative” one.93 No national database on whether a flood was exacerbated by awildfire is available.
Soil effects: Wildfire can affect soil properties in various ways. These include consuming
the surface organic layer, exposing mineral soils, transforming nutrients, accumulating
ash, soil particles lacking binding organics, and water repellency, some of which can lastyears.94 Although fire is a natural forest process, improper forest management canincrease fire severity, increasing the effects.
Unknown-Soil: The effects of wildfires on soil have been well studied, however there iscurrently no literature quantifying the economic impact.
Carbon sequestration: One of the benefits of vegetated areas is their ability to trap
carbon as they grow. The creation of an organic layer of soil due to decay also serves thispurpose. In a major fire, large areas of vegetation and soil may be lost, releasing any
90

Dearmont et al. 1998. Costs of water treatment due to diminished water quality: A case study in Texas.
Water Resources Research. 34(4): 849-853
91
Benda, Lee, et al. 2003. "Effects of post-wildfire erosion on channel environments, Boise River, Idaho."
Forest Ecology and Management 178(1): 105-119.
92
Neary, Daniel G., Gerald J. Gottfried, and Peter F. Ffolliott. 2003 "Post-wildfire watershed flood
responses." Proceedings of the 2nd International Fire Ecology Conference, Orlando, Florida.
93
Benda, Lee, et al. 2003. "Effects of post-wildfire erosion on channel environments, Boise River, Idaho."
Forest Ecology and Management 178(1): 105-119.
94
Ice, George G., Daniel G. Neary, and Paul W. Adams. 2004. "Effects of wildfire on soils and watershed
processes." Journal of Forestry 102(6): 16-20.

31

sequestered carbon into the atmosphere. If the forest is allowed to regrow, it will intheory recapture the carbon that was released during the fire. The time it takes to achievethat regrowth can be extensive though, especially for larger tree species and if the organic
soil layer is lost, meaning an increase in greenhouse gases for decades.
The social cost of carbon (SCC) was developed specifically to put an economic value on
carbon released into the atmosphere. The UK puts the SCC at around $5.44 per tonne
CO2 ($5.4 million per Tg of CO2) for the central estimate for 2017, while the last EPA
appraisal put the value at $36 per tonne of CO2 ($36.0 million per Tg of CO2).
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Wiedinmyer and Neff provides an estimate for the amount of CO2 released annually forthe entire United States for all fires from 2002 to 2006.95 Over the selected 5 years theaverage annual emissions are 213 (+/- 50) Tg CO2 per year for the lower 48 states and 80(+/- 89) Tg CO2 per year for Alaska. The dominant sources were wildfires, howeverprescribed and agricultural burns were included as well. This is roughly 4 % to 6 % of theassumed anthropogenic emissions during that time, although at the state level the CO 2
emissions per year from fire exceeds those from fossil fuel usage in some states.
Wiedinmyer and Neff acknowledges the high amount of variability and difficulties in
obtaining a national estimate, however for the sake of an initial estimate their values areused. Assuming then that the averages hold (the total emissions are 293 Tg CO 2 per year)
and CO2 emissions from structural fires are dwarfed by those in wildland fires,96 andWUI fires are not separated out, the total cost of lost carbon sequestration can be
estimated to be roughly $1.6 trillion using the UK SCC.
Unknown-Carbon: The breakdown of WUI fires from Wiedinmyer and Neff, as well as
the mentioned uncertainties in the estimate on total carbon released is unknown.
3.1.6. Timber and Agriculture Loss
The National Interagency Fire Center (NIFC) provides annual estimates of the number ofacres that were burned in wildfires. This data is submitted by dispatch centers and largely
excludes fires within municipal jurisdictions and does not specify whether the land is
grass or wooded.97 There are some federal agencies and/or states that collect data on
timber loss; however, this information is only for their jurisdiction and is not consistently
collected. For instance, Florida estimated its 1998 softwood timber loss to wildfire to be
between $354 million and $605 million; however, it does not typically estimate annual

95

Wiedinmyer, Christine, and Jason C. Neff. 2007. "Estimates of CO2 from fires in the United States:
implications for carbon management." Carbon Balance and Management 2(1): 10.
96
The authors acknowledge that this is an assumption made out of convenience, as data is lacking for justwildland fire CO2 release.
97
Thomas, Douglas and David Butry. 2011. Tracking the National Fire Problem: The Data Behind theStatistics. NIST Technical Note 1717: 32-33. <https://www.nist.gov/publications/tracking-national-fireproblem-data-behind-statistics>

32

timber losses.98 During that year, 499 000 acres were burned in Florida, resulting in
between $709.42 and $1212.42 per acre. In 2016, approximately 5 509 995 acres wereburned according to NIFC estimates.99 Using Florida’s per acre timber loss and adjusting
to 2016 dollars, one can approximate the total loss nationally to be between $5.8 billion
and $9.8 billion. This calculation makes the strong assumption that the timber proportions
in Florida are the same nationally and that the timber costs are similar as well; however,there are, currently, limited alternative methods for estimating timber loss nationally.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Unknown: A national database of timber loss does not exist despite it being one of the
major impacts of wildfire.
3.1.7. Agriculture Loss
According to the Farm Service Agency, “wildfires have caused devastating losses formany farmers and rangers.”100 In 2017, agriculture losses due to a fire in Texas were
estimated at $21 million.101 The National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS) has
data on wildfires and on agriculture; however, it does not specify agricultural losses. Anylosses in the NFIRS system would be included in the total losses discussed in Section
3.1.4.
Unknown: There is not a comprehensive database of national loss estimates for
agriculture.
3.2.

Indirect Losses

In addition to the direct losses of wildland fires, there are indirect losses. For instance, abusiness facility might be damaged in a fire, which results in the direct loss of the facility.
There is an additional loss of the business that would have occurred in the facility had it
not been damaged. The following sections discuss these indirect losses.
3.2.1. General Economic Impacts
Disasters have far reaching economic consequences beyond the initial damage.
Businesses may be lost or closed for substantial lengths of time, vital infrastructure may
be lost, the disaster may drive away a customer base, or completely alter the economy of98

Morton, Douglas C., Megan E. Roessing, Ann E. Camp, and Mary L. Tyrrell. 2003. Assessing theEnvironmental, Social, and Economic Impacts of Wildfire. GISF Research Paper 001.
<http://gisf.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/wildfire_report(1).pdf>
99
National Interagency Coordination Center. Wildland Fire Summary and Statistics Annual Report: 2016.
https://www.predictiveservices.nifc.gov/intelligence/2016_Statssumm/annual_report_2016.pdf
100
US Department of Agriculture. 2015. USDA Offers Help to Fire-Affected Farmers and Ranchers.
September. <https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2015/09/15/usda-offers-help-fire-affectedfarmers-and-ranchers>
101
Ledbetter, Kay. 2017 “Agriculture Damages from Wildfire Estimated at about $21 million.” AgriLife
Today. March 15. <https://today.agrilife.org/2017/03/15/agriculture-damages-wildfire-estimated-21million/>

33

the region, workers may be dislocated, among many other indirect effects. While notobvious in the immediate aftermath, these losses can quickly add up to a substantial total.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Business Interruption: Business interruption, loss of customer base, loss of
employment, and the loss of vital infrastructure all add to the economic losses for acommunity. Business interruption is the inability of a firm to operate, though it still
exists. The causes can be direct damage to the business structure, loss of infrastructure,
damage to stock, loss of employees due to death or displacement, among other factors.
Not only does business interruption hurt a business by not selling products, it can also
hurt a business if customers drift to other establishments during that time. These
customers may not come back, creating long-term losses from a relatively short-term
event.
The economic effects of business interruption due to wildland or WUI fires is not well
documented, even for specific fires. A study on low-intensity hurricanes from 1996 to
1998 estimated an average of $79 billion in lost output due to business interruption.102
Business Interruption - Unknown: Business interruption losses are not extensively
covered in the literature, and are typically folded into other categories, total indirect
losses for instance. These indirect losses themselves are often done in HAZUS, asoftware product of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which uses inputoutput coefficients to estimate impacts. While viable on a local scale and in relation to a
specific disaster, generalizing such an analysis to the United States as a whole is not
feasible.
Failed Infrastructure: A large disaster can cause substantial damage to theinfrastructure of the region. While direct damage is categorized as a direct loss, there aresubsequent impacts that result from infrastructure being down. Business interruption is
one example, however lost infrastructure can also cripple transit, power, water, health andpublic safety, and telecommunications (all typically rolled into indirect losses). These
have real human and economic costs associated with them. For instance, Rose et al.
estimated that the loss of electricity lifelines occurring from a simulated earthquake in the
New Madrid fault zone could result in production losses during recovery of 7 % of thegross regional product.103
Failed Infrastructure - Unknown: Unfortunately, national estimates do not exist for thecost of failed infrastructure during disasters, let alone WUI and wildland fires.
Population Decline: A disaster can have lingering impacts on a region, which can be felt
for years after the event. Notably, the population may decline as people move away tostart over somewhere else, or people may be averse to settle in the region due to theperceptions of safety in the wake of the disaster. In the wake of the Northridge
102

Burrus Jr, Robert T., et al. 2002. "Impact of low-intensity hurricanes on regional economic activity."
Natural Hazards Review 3(3): 118-125.
103
Rose, Adam, et al. 1997. "The regional economic impact of an earthquake: Direct and indirect effects ofelectricity lifeline disruptions." Journal of Regional Science 37(3): 437-458.

34

earthquake tens of thousands are believed to have left the Northridge area, while the samecan be said for Dade County Florida in the wake of multiple destructive hurricanes 104. In
the case of New Orleans, four months after Hurricane Katrina the population was 37 % of
the pre-disaster population of 437 186.105 Less people means typically means less jobs
and less growth. These findings were true for the island of Kauai after Hurricane Iniki hit
in 1992. Eighteen years after landfall Coffman and Noy estimated that the island had a 12
% smaller population than had the hurricane not occurred, with a proportional loss ofjobs.106
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Population Decline - Unknown: The economic impact of people leaving a region after adisaster is not well studied. Furthermore, to account for the national impact one would
have to counter any losses in the immediate region with any compensatory gains from theemigration.
3.2.2. Supply Chain Impacts
In 2016, Toyota announced that it would suspend much of its production in factories inJapan due to a shortage of parts caused by earthquakes.107 Natural disasters frequently
threaten supply chains and can stop production in factories that are not directly affectedby a disaster. Wildfires can pose the same risk to supply chains. If a factory is affected bya fire and there is no excess capacity at other factories to fill the gap, production can be
stopped throughout a supply chain. A classic case of supply chain disruption is the firethat occurred at a Philips microchip plant, a supplier to Ericsson, in New Mexico in 2000.
Lightning disrupted the electricity at the plant, which resulted in a fire. Although the fire
was minor, a great deal of the semiconductor plant, which must remain spotlessly clean,
was contaminated. This left Ericsson with a serious parts shortage, which was a fatal
blow to the company’s mobile phone venture.
Unknown: There is not a strong understanding of the extent that wildfires or otherdisasters disrupt supply chains on an annual basis. Input-output models and computable
general equilibrium models can be used to estimate the general economic impacts of adisaster; however, these methods are applied on a case by case basis.
3.2.3. Evacuation Costs

Alesch, Daniel, et al. 2001. “Organizations at Risk: What Happens when Small Businesses and Not-forProfits Encounter Natural Disasters.” Public Entity Risk Institute.
http://www.ecocalltoaction.com/images/Organizations_at_Risk.pdf
105
Kates, R. W., C. E. Colten, S. Laska and S. P. Leatherman. 2006. "Reconstruction of New Orleans after
Hurricane Katrina: a research perspective." Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 103(40):14653-14660.
106
Coffman, Makena, and Ilan Noy. 2012. "Hurricane Iniki: measuring the long-term economic impact of anatural disaster using synthetic control." Environment and Development Economics 17(2): 187-205.
107
Tajitsu, Naomi, and Makiko Yamazaki. 2016. “Toyota, Other Major Japanese Firms hit by Quake
Damage, Supply Disruptions.” Reuters. April 17. <http://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-quake-toyotaidUSKCN0XE08O>
104

35

The seminal paper108 on evacuation costs is Whitehead,109 which breaks evacuation costs
into:
•
•
•

Loss of income and capital depreciation
Transportation costs and transportation time
“Direct costs” while away (i.e., food, lodging, entertainment)This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Whitehead surveys North Carolina households that were affected by Hurricane Bonnie in1998 to obtain revealed and stated preference data. This data is used in a model of
evacuation decisions that provides estimates of evacuation costs, computed as thehousehold cost of evacuation (obtained from the survey) multiplied by the probability ofevacuation (obtained from the empirical analysis). This approach yields the following
estimates for hurricane evacuation costs (in 1998 USD), reproduced from Whitehead,
Table 9 (see Table 3.1). However, the survey data does provide estimates of direct
evacuation costs by destination (e.g., hotel, shelter, family) and broken down by type of
cost (e.g., lodging, food, entertainment); see Table 8 in Whitehead. Thus, Whitehead
estimates direct evacuation costs to be: $275 for hotel evacuees; $86 for shelter evacuees;$53 for evacuees who stay with family or friends; and $20 for other evacuees.

Table 3.1: Hurricane Evacuation Costs ($1988)
Hurricane Scale

Hurricane Watch

Category 1
Category 2
Category 3
Category 4
Category 5$1.05 M
$1.7 M$5.11 M
$8.35 M
$25.77 M

Voluntary
Evacuation Order$1.22 M
$1.96 M
$5.75 M
$9.22 M
$27.23 M

Mandatory
Evacuation Order$14.7 M
$19.03 M$31.85 M$35.5 M
$50.41 M

Source: Whitehead’s analysis does include direct costs, as well as travel time and travel
costs, but does not include less tangible costs such as loss of income.

108

Among other papers reviewed, Kousky, Carolyn. 2012. Informing Climate Adaptation: A Review of the
Economic Costs of Natural Disasters, their Determinants, and Risk Reduction Options. Discussion Paper.
RFF DP 12-28.
109
Whitehead, John C. 2003. “One Million Dollars per Mile? The Opportunity Costs of Hurricane
Evacuation,” Ocean and Coastal Management. 46(11-12): 1069-1083.

36

Other estimates in the literature on hurricane evacuation include:••

Pfurtscheller and Schwarze cites a paper by Joy (1993) that estimates evacuation
costs for a hurricane in a small town of New South Wales to be 1.5 M (AUS$).110
Lindell et al. model household hurricane evacuation and estimates the average
daily cost per evacuee to be $111.84 (in 2002 USD).111

Unknown: The literature on fire is even more lacking in estimates of evacuation costs
and we know nothing about wildfire-urban interface fires in particular.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Kent et al. study the Hayman Fire and note that “other related expenditures, such as
rehabilitation, water treatment, and evacuation costs add up to another $14 million,” but
offer no breakdown or citation.112
Finally, McCaffrey et al. discuss the “logistical” and “emotional” costs of fire evacuation,
but do not provide or cite any numbers.113
Morton et al., however, do note that “data on the number of persons and length ofdisplacement are often part of the BAER fire summary.”114 Note that BAER consistes ofteams that have been developed in order to address post-fire risks. Morton et al. provide
several estimates of costs using BAER reports, including evacuation costs whereavailable:••••

Carlton, Florida fire (2011); 40 homes, 1 day;
Cerro Grande fire: 18 000 people, approximately 1 week;
Double Trouble Fire: 100 homes, 1-2 days;
Hayman Fire: 38 000 people (no duration)

Similarly, Situation 209 reports include annual estimates on the number of persons
evacuated, as shown in Table 3.2.115 Back of the envelope estimates of fire evacuation
costs may be obtained using the estimates of daily costs of hurricane evacuation together
with estimates of the number of evacuees and the length of evacuation. For instance, thetotal evacuation cost per fire may be approximated as
Pfurtscheller, C and R Schwarze. 2008. “Estimating the Costs of Emergency Services During Flood
Events.” 4th International Symposium on Flood Defence: Managing Flood Risk, Reliability, andVulnerability. Toronto, Canada.
111
Lindell, Michael, Jung Eun Kang, and Carla Prater. 2011. “The Logistics of Household Hurricane
Evacuation.” Natural Hazards. 58: 1093-1109.
112
Kent, Brian et al. 2003. “Social and Economic Issues of the Hayman Fire.” USDA Forest Service Gen.
Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-114. 2003. https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/14904
113
McCaffrey, Sarah, Alan Rhodes, and Melanie Stidham. 2015 “Wildfire Evacuation and its Alternatives:
Perspectives from Four United States’ Communities.” International Journal of Wildland Fire. 24: 170-178.
114
Morton, Douglas C., Megan E. Roessing, Ann E. Camp, and Mary L. Tyrrell. 2003. Assessing theEnvironmental, Social, and Economic Impacts of Wildfire. GISF Research Paper 001.
<http://gisf.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/wildfire_report(1).pdf>
115
National Fire and Aviation Management Web Applications (FAMWEB). SIT-209.
<https://fam.nwcg.gov/fam-web/>11037

Total Cost = (Direct daily cost + Indirect daily cost) x (Length of evacuation) x(Number of persons evacuated)
Note that the variation in the number of evacuees by fire (as seen in the BAER reports)
and the number of annual fires makes it difficult to establish a relationship between
number of fires and number of evacuees. Using this approach, an average $3.0 billion incosts are incurred due to evacuation.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Table 3.2: Situation 209 Data
Year
2014
2015
2016

Number of evacuees
33 247
96 171
299 790

Number of fires
136
222
395

Source: National Fire and Aviation Management Web Applications (FAMWEB). SIT-209.
<https://fam.nwcg.gov/fam-web/>

3.2.4. Accelerated Economic Decline of Community
A disaster can often result in general economic decline for a period afterward. Many
communities experience a decrease in economic output and population decline.
Unknown: Disentangling the impact of a disaster from the myriad of other causal factorsthat affect the economic decline of a community is challenging at best. According to
Alesch et al.,116 accelerated economic decline following a disaster may include:
•
•
•
•
•

Changing economic conditions and accelerated pre-disaster trends
Business disruption and changing customer baseOutside firms increasing competition
Business owner perceptions
Loss of customers and staff shortages due to out-migration

Such losses are intangible and difficult to quantify. There exists little, if any, estimates onthese losses in the broader disaster literature, let alone the fire (and WUI) literatures.
For fire in particular, the closest attempt is Kent et al.,117 which studies the Hayman Fire.
The study finds no evidence of the Hayman fire having an impact on the regional
economy (in terms of wages, employment, and retail sales). It is possible that the effect offire on accelerating economic trends is not easily identifiable.

Alesch, Daniel, et al. 2001. “Organizations at Risk: What Happens when Small Businesses and Not-forProfits Encounter Natural Disasters.” Public Entity Risk Institute.
http://www.ecocalltoaction.com/images/Organizations_at_Risk.pdf
117
Kent, Brian et al. 2003. “Social and Economic Issues of the Hayman Fire.” USDA Forest Service Gen.
Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-114. 2003. https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/14904
116

38

3.2.5. Utility, Transportation, and Government Service Interruption

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

There are a number of instances where wildfires disrupted various services. For example,
in August of 2015 fires in Oregon and California left thousands without power.118 In May
of 2014, power was cut to several communities in California due to wildfire.119
Frequently roads are impacted such as in the 2013 Silver Fire in New Mexico.120 Reports
from Burned Area Emergency Response teams frequently include information on roadclosures and some service interruptions; however, these reports tend to focus on
individual fires and do not provide national annual estimates nor do they cover all of theservice interruptions.
Unknown: The extent that wildfires disrupt services such as utilities, transportation, andgovernment services is not well documented. Although there is frequently documentation
for some of these interruptions for individual fires, there is not a national database or
annual report.
3.2.6. Psychological Impacts from Lost Amenities
The effects of losing natural amenities is not limited to the physical loss of trees, brush,or wildlife. These features can also have effect people emotionally and mentally,
typically through the loss of the natural beauty of the region. Other amenities, such as aclean watershed or widespread pollinators fit more into ecosystem services, which are
discussed in a later section. These impacts are less tangible and extremely difficult toquantify. One method is to use the impacts on tangible assets, such as housing prices(discussed in the next section). Another means is to examine the effects on tourist andconsumer behavior of the impacted area. This serves as a proxy for the economic“health” of the WUI area and how it’s viewed.
Valuing state and national parks and wildlife refuges is routinely done. The total
economic value of the National Park Service is estimated at roughly $92 billion dollars at
a minimum.121 Of the $62 billion related to geographic holdings, less than half represents
recreational use. The difference is made up in the “value that American households placeon just knowing that” these lands exist and will exist for subsequent generations.122
Travel cost analysis puts the consumer surplus per trip in a wide range based on multiple

Stelloh, Tim. 2015. “Western Wildfires Trigger Evacuations in California, Oregon.” NBC News. August
17. <http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/western-wildfires/western-wildfires-evacuations-power-outagesheavy-smoke-n410761>
119
Lee, Morgan. 2014. “Wildfires Cut off Power to Thousands.” May 14.
<http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-power-outages-wildfires-2014may14-htmlstory.html>
120
US Forest Service. 2013. Silver Fire: Burned Area Emergency Response Team Executive Summary.
<https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5430883.pdf>
121
Haefele et al. 2016. “Total Economic Valuation of the National Park Service Lands and Programs:
Results of a Survey of The American Public.” Colorado State University.
http://webdoc.agsci.colostate.edu/DARE/PubLinks/NPSTotalEconValue.pdf
122
ibid
118

39

models, ranging from as low as $37.4 to as high as $327.5 in Zawacki et al.,123 and from$52.58 to $193.74 in Mendes et al.124

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

While the benefits and value of natural amenities are well understood at a national level,
the effects of wildland and WUI fires are not well documented. Regional level estimates
are available however. Tourism revenue dropped by roughly $138 million in 1998 in the
St. Johns River Water Management District due to wildfire, and $32.5 million in the San
Diego region.125,126 A travel cost study on the impact of wildland and prescribed fires in
New Mexico by Hesselna et al. found that the value of a forest in terms of trips after afire was not only dependent on time, but also the reason for the trip.127 Both hikers andmountain bikers typically saw a decrease in the number of trips per hiker as the forest
recovered from a crown fire, but the value per trip increased for hikers, while decreased
for mountain bikers. No estimates for other reasons for visits (camping, day trips) were
found, nor is it reasonable to assume that the significant factors in the New Mexico study
are relevant nationwide.
Unknown: No national assessments of the overall losses in tourism value due to wildfire
exist, and those studies that do exist are not capable of being scaled up to a national level.
3.2.7. Housing Market Impact
The risk of disaster tends to have an impact on the value of housing in the at-risk area. A
number of studies exist that examine this issue. Mueller et al. estimate that an initialwildfire incident reduces house prices by about 10 %, while a second fire reduces house
prices by nearly 23 %.128 However, other research has suggested that homebuyers are,largely, unaware of wildfire risk. For instance, Champ et al. estimated in a Colorado
Springs case study that only 27 % of homebuyers were aware of the risk to wildfire whenpurchasing their home.129 In the same study, homeowners tended to underestimate theirwildfire risk with 21 % believing they had a low risk when in fact only 1 % had a low
risk. Only 13 % identified themselves as being in an extreme or high risk area when in
123

Zawacki, William T., Allan Marsinko, and J. Michael Bowker. 2000. "A travel cost analysis of
nonconsumptive wildlife-associated recreation in the United States." Forest science 46(4): 496-506.
124
Mendes, Isabel, and Isabel Proença. 2011. "Measuring the social recreation per-day net benefit of thewildlife amenities of a national park: a count-data travel-cost approach." Environmental management 48(5):920.
125Butry, David T., et al. 2001. "What is the price of catastrophic wildfire?." Journal of Forestry 99(11): 917.
126
Diaz, John M. 2012. “Economic Impacts of Wildfire”. Southern Fire Exchange.
https://fireadaptednetwork.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/03/economic_costs_of_wildfires.pdf
127
Hayley Hesselna, John B. Loomisb, Armando González-Cabánc, Susan Alexander. 2003. Wildfire
effects on hiking and biking demand in New Mexico: a travel cost study. Journal of Environmental
Management 69: 359–368
128
Mueller, Julie M., John B. Loomis, and Armando González-Cabán. 2009. “Do Repeated Wildfires
Change Homebuyers’Demand for Homes in High-Risk Areas? A Hedonic Analysis of the Short- and LongTerm Effects of Repeated Wildfires on House Prices in Southern California.” Journal of Real Estate
Finance and Economics. 38(2): 155-172. DOI: 10.1007/s11146-007-9083-1.
129Champ, Patricia Ann, Geoffrey H. Donovan, and Christopher M. Barth. 2009. “Homebuyers andWildfire Risk: A Colorado Springs Case Study.” Society & Natural Resources: An International Journal.
23(1): 58-70.

40

fact it was 27 %. This paper also identified that proximity to dangerous topography was,actually, associated with an increase in the sales price of a home; however, Donovan etal. illustrated that the dissemination of wildfire risk information can reverse thisrelationship.130

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Thomas and Butry estimate that between 2001 and 2010 4.8 million residential structures
were within the vicinity of a wildfire or 481 800 per year on average. An additional 2.5
million were within the vicinity of two or more fires or 247 500 per year on average.131
Additionally, the National Association of Realtors estimates the mean sales price for ahome in 2015 was $267 300.132 Using these estimates along with Mueller et al (2009)
house price reduction, one can approximate a potential house price impact of wildfires
nationally:
Equation 9

𝐻𝑃𝑅 = 𝑀𝐹 𝑅𝐹 𝐴 + 𝑀𝑀𝐹 𝑅𝑀𝐹 𝐴

Where
𝐻𝑃𝑅 = House price impact from wildfire
𝑀𝐹 = Percent price reduction for one fire incident
𝑅𝐹 = Number of residential structures within the vicinity of one wildfire
𝐴 = Mean house price
𝑀𝑀𝐹 = Percent price reduction for two fire incidents
𝑅𝑀𝐹 = Number of residential structures within the vicinity of more than one wildfire
Using Equation 9 and adjusting to 2016 dollars using the consumer price index, there isan estimated $28.3 billion in potential residential sales price impact.
Unknown: Although an approximation of sales price impact can be calculated, the true
impact is unknown. The estimate above relies on a study of southern California. Impacts
are likely to vary from region to region.
3.2.8. Interference with Military Operations
In 2015, a military flare ignited a wildfire at Camp Grayling in Michigan. 133 This is not
an unusual event, given the nature of military training; however, these fires pose a risk to

Donovan, Geoffrey H., Patricia A. Champ, and David T. Butry. 2007 “Wildfire Risk and Housing
Prices: A Case Study from Colorado Springs.” Land Economics. 83(2): 217-233.
131
Thomas, Douglas and David Butry. 2014 “Areas of the US Wildland-Urban Interface Threatened by
Wildfire During the 2001-2010 Decade.” Natural Hazards. 71(3): 1561-1585.
132
National Association of Realtors. Existing-Home Sales. <https://www.nar.realtor/topics/existing-homesales>
133
Johnson, Mark. 2015. “Military Flare during Training Exercise Ignites Massive Wildfire at Camp
Grayling.” Gaylord Herald Times. April 27. <http://www.petoskeynews.com/gaylord/featured-ght/topgallery/military-flare-during-training-exercise-ignites-massive-wildfire-at-camp/article_1681f36c-e65c582d-8c57-c94adc7b87f7.html>
13041

military operations. Military operations have even developed wildland fire management
plans such as the one for training lands for the US Army in Hawaii. 134
Unknown: Although wildland fire can disrupt military training and operations, there is
not a public database that tracks the total cost of these incidents.
3.2.9. Loss of Ecosystem Services

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Ecosystem services are generally defined as “any positive benefit that wildlife or
ecosystems provides to people.”135 Examples include clean natural water services,pollination by insects or birds, and natural reseeding of areas. WUI and wildland fires
destroy habitat, vital ecological features, and kill or displace local wildlife for potentiallysignificant periods of time. These losses culminate in the loss of ecosystem services for
the WUI region.
Generally speaking, ecosystem services are difficult to quantify in terms of monetary
value. Specific studies exist for local regions, not all of which fall within the UnitedStates. Watershed health and river fauna are well represented in the literature. Loomis etal. found that the willingness to pay for better watershed services using a contingent
valuation survey for a 45-mile section of the Platte river.136 Similar studies found $196
million per person annually for lake preservation,137 $526 to preserve the Mono Lakeecosystem,138 and $415 per person to increase Salmon in the San Joaquin river.139
For coffee farms in Jamaica, birds have been found to elevate farm income by $75 perhectare-year140 and $310 per hectare-year141 by eating crop damaging insects. The abilityof birds to naturally reseed has been valued at $2115 to $9450 per hectare based on a
study for Eurasian Jays in Stockjolm National Urban Park in Sweden.142 National

US Army. “Integrated Wildland Fire Management Plan Overview.”<https://www.garrison.hawaii.army.mil/sbcteis/feis/Appendices/Appendix%20O.pdf>
135
National Wildlife Federation. 2017. “Ecosystem Services.” https://www.nwf.org/Wildlife/WildlifeConservation/Ecosystem-Services.aspx
136
Loomis, John, et al. 2000. "Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystem services in an
impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey." Ecological economics 33(1): 103-117.
137
Desvousges, W., Smith, V.K., McGivney, M., 1983. A Comparison of Alternative Approaches to
Estimating Recreation and Related Benefits of Water Quality Improvements. Economic Analysis Division,
US Environmental Protection Agency, Washington, DC.
138
Moore, W., McCarl, B., 1987. Off-site costs of soil erosion: a case study of the Willamette valley. West.
J. Agric. Econom. 12 (1): 42–49.
139
Hanemann, M., Loomis, J., Kanninen, B.1991. Statistical efficiency of double-bounded dichotomouschoice contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics. 73(5): 1255–1263.
140
Kellermann, J. L., M. D. Johnson, A. M. Stercho, and S. C. Hackett. 2008. Ecological and economic
services provided by birds on Jamaican Blue Mountain coffee farms. Conservation Biology 22:1177–1185.
141
Johnson, M. D., J. L. Kellermann, and A. M. Stercho. 2010. Pest reduction services by birds in shadeand sun coffee in Jamaica. Animal Conservation 13:140–147.
142
Hougner, C., J. Colding, and T. Soderqvist. 2006. Economic valuation of a seed dispersal service in the
Stockholm National Urban Park, Sweden. Ecological Economics 59:364–374.
134

42

estimates for insect pollination are around $29 billion in farm income in 2010.143 Various
other studies on localized valuations exist in the literature.
Unknown: Despite the availability of individual studies, determining a national value isdifficult due to the absence of nation-wide studies, and the localized nature of theservices in question.
3.2.10. Increased Risk of Other Hazards
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Following a fire, there are increased risks for flooding, debris flow, landslides, invasive
species, erosion, and altered water quality. 144 The risk floods and debris flow increases
due to the exposure of bare ground. Burned debris and chemicals affect water quality.
Burned Area Emergency Rehabilitation (BAER) teams have been developed in order toaddress these post-fire risks. In addition to creating a plan of action, these teams also
develop reports on the conditions that a wildfire has created.
Unknown: There is no national aggregated database tracking the occurrence of post fireincidents nor is there any national cost data associated with these incidents.
3.2.11. Decreased Tax Base
Section 3.2.7 discussed the decrease in price from a fire. A subsequent impact of adecrease in housing value is a decrease in the tax base. According to the Tax Foundation,state average property tax rates range between 0.28 % and 2.38 %. Applying these rates
to the price decrease discussed in Section 3.2.7, there is between $79.2 million and$673.2 million in decreased property tax.
Unknown: There is not a strong understanding of the impact that wildfires have on tax
bases. Additionally, there is not a database tracking this type of information. Housing
prices can be impacted by wildfires; however, it is not clear to what extent it impacts
housing assessments and taxes.
3.2.12. Health and Environmental Impacts from Fire Retardants
The health and environmental impacts of the fire retardants used in fighting WUI andwildland fires are well understood. The effects on terrestrial ecosystems is negligible
based on actual use,145,146 though some plants may be more sensitive.147 There is little
143

Ramanujan, Krishna. 2012. Insect pollinators contribute $29 billion to U.S. farm income. Cornell.
http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2012/05/insect-pollinators-contribute-29b-us-farm-income
144
USGS. USGS. Newsletter. 2006. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2006/3015/2006-3015.pdf
145
Kostas D. Kalabokidis. 2000. Effects of Wildfire Suppression Chemicals on People and theEnvironment – A Review. Global Nest: The International Journal. 2 (2): 129-137.
146
Dietrich, Joseph P., et al. 2014. "Toxicity of PHOS-CHEK LC-95A and 259F fire retardants to oceanand stream-type Chinook salmon and their potential to recover before seawater entry." Science of the Total
Environment 490: 610-621.
147
Robyn Adams and Dianne Simmons. 1999. Ecological Effects of Fire Fighting Foams and Retardants.
Conference Proceedings of the Australian Bushfire Conference, Albury, July.

43

impact on air quality, and no impact on human health unless chemical is deployed
directly on people. The overall effect is throat irritation and breathing difficulty due toammonia gas release, although these are usually temporary in nature. Pilots deploying thechemical have noted eye and nasal irritation, though chemical levels were below
threshold values. The cause in these cases may simply be the chemical odor.148
Fire retardant chemicals for wildland fires have consistently been found to be toxic toaquatic ecosystems.149 One study found ammonia to be the primary cause,150 while Calfee
and Little found the CTS-R chemical to be phototoxic to fathead minnows.151
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Unknown: While the toxicity of fire retardants to aquatic ecosystems is established, theoverall impacts, economically and in practice, of these effects are not well documented.
All studies focused on short-term effects, with no mention of the long-term effects of
exposure.

148

Kostas D. Kalabokidis 2000. Effects of Wildfire Suppression Chemicals on People and the Environment– A Review. Global Nest: The International Journal. 2 (2): 129-137.
149
Robyn Adams and Dianne Simmons. 1999. Ecological Effects of Fire Fighting Foams and Retardants.
Conference Proceedings of the Australian Bushfire Conference, Albury, July.
150
Kostas D. Kalabokidis. 2000. Effects of Wildfire Suppression Chemicals on People and theEnvironment – A Review. Global Nest: The International Journal. 2 (2): 129-137.
151
Robin D. Calfee, Edward E. Little. 2003. Effects of a fire-retardant chemical to fathead minnows inexperimental streams. Environmental Science and Pollution Research September, 10(5): 296–300

44

Estimation of Total Costs and Losses
Section 2 and Section 3 provided a narrative describing the available data on wildland
fire costs and losses. Bringing this data together can facilitate aggregating all the costs
and losses. Table 4.1 provides a list of the costs, the section where they were discussed,
variables relevant to the cost, and an estimate of the cost. Costs that cannot be estimatedare omitted from the table. There are eleven costs that can be estimated. Table 4.2
provides similar information for the losses associated with WUI fires, which has nine
items that can be estimated.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

The total of annualized costs and losses of wildfire, as seen in Table 4.3, is between $71.1
and $347.8 billion. The total estimate with the indicator “Low,” is a sum of all the low
estimates combined with the “Estimate” value when the “Low” value is not available.
The “Estimate/Low” is the sum of all the “Estimate” values combined with the “Low”
values used when the “Estimate” value is not available. The “Estimate/High” value is thesum of all the “Estimate” values combined with the “High” values when the “Estimate”
value is not available. The “High” value is the sum of all the “High” values along withthe “Estimate” value when there is not a “High” value.
The “Low” estimate for the costs amounts to $7.6 billion while the “High” estimate is$62.8 billion (not shown in Table 4.3). The three largest values represent 65.1 % of the“Low” value and 93.3 % of the “High” value. The top three for the “Low” value are local
fire department costs, defensible space costs, and federal suppression costs. For the“High” value, the largest three includes defensible space costs, local fire department
costs, and state suppression costs.
The “Low” estimate for the losses alone (not shown in Table 4.3) is $63.5 billion and the“High” estimate is $285.0 billion. The three largest values for the “Low” losses estimate
and the “High” losses estimate represent 98.6 % and 96.0 % of the total, respectively. For
the “Low” losses value, the top three includes deaths, impact on housing prices, andtimber loss. For the “High” value, the top three includes deaths, evacuation, and theimpact on housing prices.

45

Table 4.1: Costs Associated with WUI Fires
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Costs
Section 2.1

Preparedness
Section 2.2.1

Variables
USFS

DOI

Indicator
Estimate

Estimated Total
Cost
1 483 278 641

5-YR Low

976 363 507

5-YR High

1 483 278 641

1 145 800 000

319 000 000

Montana costestimate peracre (low)Montana costestimate peracre (high)participation

homes at risk

Acres perstructureLow

1 664 089 967

Defensible
Space

1 361

43 56091%

3 170 880

0.4

High

53 250 878 955

Section 2.2.1

USFS

DOI

Estimate
5-YR Low

532 331 773
444 335 519

FuelsManagement361 500 000

164 000 000

5-YR High539 622 602

Estimate

1 551 349

Section 2.2.3

FEMA Disaster
AssistanceDisasterAssistance

1 551 349

Section 2.3

USFS

USFS-FLAME

DOI

DOI-FLAME

Estimate
5-YR Low

1 412 395 582
1 176 354 995

Federal:Suppression

708 000 000

303 100 000

291 700 000

92 000 000

5-YR High

1 767 823 492

Section 2.3

USFS

DOI

Estimate
5-YR Low

131 538 705
12 353 905

117 800 000

12 100 000

5-YR High151 689 746

Fire Protection

Estimate

2 060 526 192

2 000 000 000

Low

1 030 263 096

High

2 060 526 192

Federal:
Other
Section 2.3
State:
Suppression
andProtection

46Section 2.3

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Fire
Department
Career (dollars)

Fire
Department
Volunteer(dollars)# of Firedept calls# Reported
Fires# Rep Natural
Veg Fires

41 900 000 000

94 900 000 000

31 644 500

1 021 846

191 178

Apportion based on call volume

Estimate

2 129 015 866

Unlike Feds, this includes all fire protection &suppression activity

5-YR Low

2 129 015 866

5-YR High

3 345 596 361

Estimate

32 878 928

Estimate

149 863 857

Estimate

19 795 000

Local FD
Section 2.4.1

Legal Costs(judicial anddefense)Number of
Cases received(2007)

Expenditures publicdefenders(2007)

Arson
arrests(2014)

State
Expenditures(2007)

State Judicial
and legal
expenditures(2007)

Number ofcases - state(2007)NFPA proportionof arsonthat isoutdoors(20072011)

5 572 450

2 310 040 000

9 463

833 358 000

6 183 948 000

1 491 420

75.0%

Prisoner
Population(2015)

Prisoner
Population Property Crimes(2015)

Jail
population convicted(2015)

Jail Population- unconvicted(2015)

Jail, convictedof arson(2002)

Jail,
unconvicted,
arson (2002)

Jail,convictedofproperty
offenses(2002)NFPA proportionof arsonthat isoutdoors(20072011)

Cost perprisoner

1 526 800

19.0%

258 800

434 600

0.3%

0.5%

24.9%

75.0%

30 620Section 2.4.1

Incarceration- jail andprisonSection 2.4.2

Research andDevelopment

US Forest
Serviceresearch anddevelopment
19 795 000

47

Table 4.2: Losses Associated with WUI Fires
LossesThis publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Section 3.1.1

DeathsSection 3.1.2

Injuries
Section 3.1.3

Psychological
Impacts
Section 3.2.3

Evacuation

Variables

Indicator

Estimated Total
Cost

Estimated
number ofannual deaths
from wildfire
smoke (acute)- low estimate

Estimated
number ofannual deaths
from wildfire
smoke (acute) high estimate

Estimatedannualnumber of
direct deaths
from wildfire(civilian)

Estimatedannual numberof direct
deaths fromwildfire(firefighter)

Value of astatistical life
(VSL)

Low

28 540 800 000

2 940

21 09515

18$9 600 000

High

202 828 800 000

Estimated
exposedpopulation(firefighter)

Rate of adverse
health impact(firefighter)

Average costto treatadversehealthimpactAnnual injuries(Firefighter)

AnnualInjuries(Civilian)

Value of astatisticalinjury (VSI)

30 00029%

10 971

260

88

189 198

Estimate

177 450 535

Estimated
exposedpopulation(firefighter)

Rate ofpsychologicalimpact (PTSD) in
exposedpopulation(firefighters)

Average costto treat
psychologicalimpact(PTSD)

30 00020%

4 075

Estimate

24 450 000

Persons
displaced

Length ofdisplacement(days)

Direct costs

Annual fires

100

1

29

136

Low

400 502

38 000

7

405

395

High

42 544 921 839

18 700

4

160

251

Mean

2 999 448 168

18 000

4

102

222

Median

1 635 711 020

48

Section 3.1.4

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Structures
Section 3.1.6

NIFC: Minor
structures

NIFC:
Commercial

NIFC: mixed
commercial/residential

NIFC:
residences

Directdamage structuresandcontent:
Avg 20022006 NFIRS

1 025

78

17

3 192

160 200
000

Florida 1998
timber loss
(low)

Florida 1998
timber loss
(high)

Florida 1998
acres burned

Total US acres
burned354 000 000

605 000 000

499 000

5 509 995

Thomas andButry
estimate forannual #homes within
two or morefires
247 500

Timber loss
Section 3.1.8

DOI

Burned Area
Rehab

18 000 000

617 021 796

low
high
Estimate
5-YR Low
5-YR High

5 755 594 981
9 836 539 445
18 227 072
12 455 166
45 263 896

Estimate

28 286 518 963

Tax Foundation
tax rate

Low

79 202 253

Tax base loss

2.38%

High

673 219 151

Mueller et al.
price impact
for one fire

Mueller et al.
price impact fora second fire

NAR
estimate forthe meanhouse priceThomas andButry estimate
for annual #homes within
one fire

10%23%

267 300

481 800

Tax
Foundation
tax rate
0.28%

1 248

Estimate

Section 3.2.7

Potential
Impact on
housing price
Section
3.2.11# ofStructures:
NFIRS

49

Table 4.3: Estimated Total WUI Costs and Losses ($2016)
LossesSection 2.1
Preparedness
Section 2.2.1
Defensible Space
Section 2.2.1

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Fuels Management
Section 2.2.3
Disaster Assistance
Section 2.3
Federal: Suppression
Section 2.3
Federal: Other
Section 2.3
State: Suppression and Protection
Section 2.3
Local FD
Section 2.4.1
Legal Costs (judicial and defense)
Section 2.4.1
Incarceration - jail and prison
Section 2.4.2
Research and Development
Section 3.1.1
DeathsSection 3.1.2
Injuries
Section 3.1.3
Psychological Impacts
Section 3.2.3

Evacuation
Section 3.1.4
Structures
Section 3.1.6
Timber loss
Section 3.1.8
Burned Area Rehab
Section 3.2.7
Potential Impact on housing price
Section 3.2.11
Tax base loss
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL
TOTAL

Indicator
Estimate
5-YR Low
5-YR HighLow
High
Estimate
5-YR Low
5-YR High

Estimated Total Cost
1,483,278,641
976,363,507
1,483,278,641
1,664,089,967
53,250,878,955
532,331,773
444,335,519
539,622,602

Estimate
Estimate
5-YR Low
5-YR High
Estimate
5-YR Low
5-YR High
Estimate
Low
High
Estimate
5-YR Low
5-YR High

1,551,349
1,412,395,582
1,176,354,995
1,767,823,492
131,538,705
12,353,905
151,689,746
2,060,526,192
1,030,263,096
2,060,526,192
2,129,015,866
2,129,015,866
3,345,596,361

Estimate

32,878,928

Estimate

149,863,857

EstimateLow
High

19,795,000
28,540,800,000
202,828,800,000

Estimate

177,450,535

Estimate
Low
High
Mean
Median24,450,000
400,50242,544,921,839
2,999,448,168
1,635,711,020

EstimatelowhighEstimate
5-YR Low
5-YR High

617,021,796
5,755,594,981
9,836,539,445
18,227,072
12,455,166
45,263,896

Estimate
Low
High
Low
Estimate/Low
Estimate/HighHigh

28,286,518,963
79,202,253
673,219,151
71,130,760,185
73,116,931,963
346,238,240,473
347,837,690,748

50

Gaps and Unknowns

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Section 2 and Section 3 provided a narrative describing the available data on wildland
fire costs and losses, exposing gaps in the data. Some cost/loss items have well
documented data; thus, an estimate can be made with low uncertainty. Other cost/loss
items can be estimated; however, these estimates require a great deal of assumptions andapproximations, resulting in high uncertainty. Yet other cost/loss items cannot be
estimated at all. Research in measuring those cost/loss items that have a combination ofhigh cost and high uncertainty or are unknown, have a greater potential for facilitating
cost effective policy decisions.
Table 5.1 provides an estimated order of magnitude for the costs and losses along with anassessment of the uncertainty in the estimate for the United States. In the case that a value
is unknown, an assessment of the magnitude of the cost/loss was made. A number of cost
items are estimated to be in the billions and have a high uncertainty, including rural andmunicipal suppression, defensible space, timber loss, evacuation costs, and the housing
market impact.

51

Table 5.1: Magnitude of Cost/Loss and Uncertainty at National Level
ORDER OFMAGNITUDE$ < Millions$$ 10s Millions$$$ 100s Millions$$$$ Billions

UNCERTAINTY? Low?? Medium??? High???? Unknown

$$$$

?

$$$
$$$$
$$
$

?
???
????
??

$$$$
$$$$
$$$$
$$$$

?
?
???
???

$$
$$$
$$
$$
$$
$$

??
??
????
???
????
????

$$$$
$$
$$$
$$$
$$
$$$$
$$$
$$

??
???
???
????
????
???
????
???

$$$
$$$$
$$$
$$$
$$
$$
$$
$$$$
$$$
$$$
$$$
$$$
$$$

????
???
????
????
????
????
????
???
????
????
???
????
????

Costs

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Preparedness
Mitigation
Fuels Management
Fuel treatments (Rx fire, thinning)
Defensible Space / Firewise
Insurance
Disaster Assistance
Suppression
Fire Departments (Labor, Equipment, Training)FederalState
Municipal (Professional)
Rural (Volunteer)
Cross-Cutting
Legal
Prosecution
Incarceration
Civil / Liability
Science / Research & Development
Building Codes & Standards
Regulations (e.g., Zoning)
LossesDirectDeaths and Injuries (Civilian and Firefighter)
Psychological Impacts (PTSD)
Structure and Infrastructure Loss
Environmental impact
Habitat & Wildlife loss
Timber Loss
Agriculture Loss
Remediation/cleanup
Indirect
General Economic Impacts (Business Interruption, Tourism, Supply Chain)
Evacuation Costs
Accelerated Economic Decline of Community
Utility and Pipeline Interruption (Elec, Gas, Water, Oil)Transportation interruption (e.g., Roads and Rail)
Government Service Interruption (inc. Education)
Psychological Impacts (Loss of Natural Amenities)
Housing Market Impact (Loss Due to Fire Risk)
Loss of Ecosystem Services (e.g., Watershed/Water Service)
Increased Risk of Other Hazards (e.g., mudslide, invasive species)
Decrease in Tax Base (Structure Loss or Decline in Value of Structure)
Decrease in Government Services
Health/Environmental Impacts from Use of Fire Retardants / Suppressants52

References
Absher, James D., Jerry J. Vaske, and Katie M. Lyon. 2013. “Overcoming Barriers to
Firewise Actions by Residents. Final Report to Joint Fire Science Program.”
http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/44796.
Absher, James D., Jerry J. Vaske, and Lori B. Shelby. 2010. Residents’ Responses to
Wildland Fire Programs: A Review of Cognitive and Behavioral Studies. DIANE
Publishing.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Abt, K.L., D.T. Butry, J.P. Prestemon, and S. Scranton. 2015. “Effect of Fire Prevention
Programs on Accidental and Incendiary Wildfires on Tribal Lands in the United States.”
International Journal of Wildland Fire 24: 749-762.
Addington, R.N., S.J. Hudson, J.K Hiers, M.D. Hurteau, T.F. Hutcherson, G. Matusick,and J.M. Parker. 2015. International Journal of Wildland Fire 24: 778-783.
Adetona, Olorunfemi, et al. 2016. "Review of the health effects of wildland fire smoke on
wildland firefighters and the public." Inhalation toxicology 28(3): 95-139.
Ager, A.A., N.M. Vaillant, M.A. Finney. 2010. “A Comparison of Landscape Fuel
Treatment Strategies to Mitigate Wildland Fire Risk in the Urban Interface and Preserve
Old Forest Structure.” Forest Ecology and Management 259: 1556-1570.
Alesch, Daniel, et al. 2001. “Organizations at Risk: What Happens when Small
Businesses and Not-for-Profits Encounter Natural Disasters.” Public Entity Risk Institute.
http://www.ecocalltoaction.com/images/Organizations_at_Risk.pdf
Analitis, Antonis, Ioannis Georgiadis, and Klea Katsouyanni. 2011. "Forest fires areassociated with elevated mortality in a dense urban setting." Occupational andenvironmental medicine: oem-2010.
Ancog, R.C., L.M. Florece, O.B. Nicopior. 2016. “Fire Occurrence and Fire Mitigation
Strategies in a Grassland Reforestation Area in the Philippines.” Forest Policy andEconomics 64: 35-45.
Barreal, J. and M.L. Loureiro. 2015. “Modelling Spatial Patterns and Temporal Trends ofWildfires in Galicia (NW Spain).” Forest Systems 24(2): 1-18.
Benda, Lee, et al. 2003. "Effects of post-wildfire erosion on channel environments, Boise
River, Idaho." Forest Ecology and Management 178(1): 105-119.
Britton, Carla Lea. 2010. "Risk factors for injury among federal wildland firefighters in
the United States."
Brosofske, K.D., D.T. Cleland, and S.C. Saunders. 2007. “Factors Influencing Modern
Wildfire Occurrence in the Mark Twain National Forest, Missouri.” Southern Journal ofApplied Forestry 31(2): 73-84.

53

Bühler, M.D., M. Curth, and L.A. Garibaldi. 2013. “Demography and Socioeconomic
Vulnerability Influence Fire Occurrence in Bariloche (Argentina).” Landscape and
Urban Planning 110: 64-73.
Bureau of Justice Statistics. 2012. Census of Public Defender Offices, 2007. September.
NCJ 228229. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/spdp07.pdf
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Burrus Jr, Robert T., et al. 2002. "Impact of low-intensity hurricanes on regional
economic activity." Natural Hazards Review 3(3): 118-125.
Butry, David T., et al. 2001. "What is the price of catastrophic wildfire?" Journal ofForestry 99(11): 9-17.
Butry, D.T. 2009. “Fighting Fire with Fire: Estimating the Efficacy of Wildfire
Mitigation Programs using Propensity Scores.” Environmental Ecology Statistics 16:
291-319.
California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection. 2015 Wildfire Activity Statistics.
2016.
Carson, E. Ann and Elizabeth Anderson. 2016. “Prisoners in 2015,” Bureau of Justice
Statistics, December. https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p15.pdf
Champ, Patricia Ann, Geoffrey H. Donovan, and Christopher M. Barth. 2009.
“Homebuyers and Wildfire Risk: A Colorado Springs Case Study.” Society & Natural
Resources: An International Journal. 23(1): 58-70.
Coffman, Makena, and Ilan Noy. 2012. "Hurricane Iniki: measuring the long-term
economic impact of a natural disaster using synthetic control." Environment andDevelopment Economics 17(2): 187-205.
Cole, Valerie. 2011. “PTSD and Natural Disasters, Defense Centers of Excellence for
Psychological Health and Traumatic Brain Injury.” DCoE. Webinar Aug. 25.
http://www.dcoe.mil/content/Navigation/Documents/Cole%20%20PTSD%20and%20Nat
ural%20Disasters.pdf
Curth, M., C. Biscayart, L. Ghermandi, and G. Pfister. 2012. “Wildland-Urban Interface
Fires and Socioeconomic Conditions: A Case Study of a Northwestern Patagonia City.”
Environmental Management 49: 876-891.
D’Andrea, M., P. Fiorucci, and T.P. Holmes. 2010. “A Stochastic Forest Fire Model for
Future Land Cover Scenarios Assessment.” Natural Hazards Earth Systems Sciences 10:2161-2167.

54

Daniels, Robert D., et al. 2014. "Mortality and cancer incidence in a pooled cohort of US
firefighters from San Francisco, Chicago and Philadelphia (1950–2009)." Occupational
and Environmental Medicine. 71(6): 388-397.
Dearmont et al. 1998. Costs of water treatment due to diminished water quality: A casestudy in Texas. Water Resources Research. 34(4): 849-853

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Desvousges, W., Smith, V.K., McGivney, M., 1983. A Comparison of Alternative
Approaches to Estimating Recreation and Related Benefits of Water Quality
Improvements. Economic Analysis Division, US Environmental Protection Agency,
Washington, DC.
Diaz, John M. 2012. “Economic Impacts of Wildfire”. Southern Fire Exchange.
https://fireadaptednetwork.org/wpcontent/uploads/2014/03/economic_costs_of_wildfires.pdf
Dietrich, Joseph P., et al. 2014. "Toxicity of PHOS-CHEK LC-95A and 259F fire
retardants to ocean-and stream-type Chinook salmon and their potential to recover before
seawater entry." Science of the Total Environment 490: 610-621.
Donovan, Geoffrey H., Patricia A. Champ, and David T. Butry. 2007 “Wildfire Risk andHousing Prices: A Case Study from Colorado Springs.” Land Economics. 83(2): 217233.
Donovan, G.H., and D.B. Rideout. 2003. “A Reformulation of the Cost Plus Net Value
Change (C+NVC) Model of Wildfire Economics.” Forest Science 49(2): 318-323.
Doris J. James, “Profile of Jail Inmates,2002,” Bureau of Justice Statistics Special
Report, October 12, 2004, https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pji02.pdf
FEMA. “Disaster Relief Fund: Monthly Report,” https://www.fema.gov/medialibrary/assets/documents/31789
FEMA. “Tennessee Wildfires (DR-4293).” https://www.fema.gov/disaster/4293
FEMA. Disaster Declarations, https://www.fema.gov/disasters
Fernandes, P.M., and H.S. Botelho. 2003. “A Review of Prescribed Burning
Effectiveness in Fire Hazard Reduction.” International Journal of Wildland Fire 12: 117128.
Ferreira-Leite, F., A. Bento-Goncalves, A. Vieira, A. Nunes, and L. Lourenco. 2016.
“Incidence and Recurrence of Large Forest Fires in Mainland Portugal.” Natural Hazards
84: 1035-1053.
Forests and Rangelands. “The Federal Land Assistance, Management and Enhancement
Act of 2009 Report to Congress.”55

https://www.forestsandrangelands.gov/strategy/documents/reports/2_ReportToCongress0
3172011.pdf.
Galea, Sandro, et al. 2012. "Treatment for posttraumatic stress disorder in military andveteran populations: Initial assessment." Washington, DC: The National Academies.
Ganteaume, A., and M. Long-Fournel. 2015. “Driving Factors of Fire Density Can
Spatially Vary at the Local Scale in South-Eastern France.” International Journal of
Wildland Fire 24: 650-664.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Gorte, Ross. 2013. “The Rising Cost of Wildfire Protection,” Headwater Economics.
Gorte, J.K., and R.W. Gorte. 1979. “Application of Economic Techniques to Fire
Management—A Status Review and Evaluation.” USDA Forest Service Technical
Report. INT-53. 26 pages.
Grala, K., R.K. Grala, A. Hussain, W.H. Cooke III, and J.M. Varner III. 2017. “Impact of
Human Factors on Wildfire Occurrence in Mississippi, United States.” Forest Policy andEconomics 81: 38-47.
Gralewicz, N.J., T.A. Nelson, and M.A. Wulder. 2012. “Spatial and Temporal Patterns ofWildfires Ignitions in Canada from 1980 to 2006.” International Journal of WildlandFire 21: 230-242.
Groen, Amy H., and Scott W. Woods. 2008. "Effectiveness of aerial seeding and straw
mulch for reducing post-wildfire erosion, north-western Montana, USA." International
Journal of Wildland Fire 17(5): 559-571.
Hawbaker, T.J., V.C. Radeloff, S.I. Stewart, R.B. Hammer, N.S. Keuler, and M.K.
Clayton. 2013. “Human and Biophysical Influences on Fire Occurrence in the UnitedStates.” Ecological Applications 23(3): 565-582.
Haefele et al. 2016. “Total Economic Valuation of the National Park Service Lands andPrograms: Results of a Survey of The American Public.” Colorado State University.
http://webdoc.agsci.colostate.edu/DARE/PubLinks/NPSTotalEconValue.pdf
Hall, John R. 2014. The Total Cost of Fire in the United States. National Fire Protection
Association. http://www.nfpa.org/news-and-research/fire-statistics-and-reports/firestatistics/fires-in-the-us/overall-fire-problem/total-cost-of-fireHanemann, M., Loomis, J., Kanninen, B.1991. Statistical efficiency of double-boundeddichotomous choice contingent valuation. American Journal of Agricultural Economics.
73(5): 1255–1263.
Hayley Hesselna, John B. Loomisb, Armando González-Cabánc, Susan Alexander. 2003.
Wildfire effects on hiking and biking demand in New Mexico: a travel cost study. Journalof Environmental Management 69: 359–368

56

Headley, R. 1916. “Fire Suppression District 5.” USDA Forest Service. Washington, DC.
58 pages.
Henderson, Sarah B. et al. 2011. “Three Measures of Forest Fire Smoke Exposure andtheir Associations with Respiratory and Cardiovascular Health Outcomes in a PopulationBased Cohort.” Environmental Health Perspectives. 119: 1266-1271.
https://ehp.niehs.nih.gov/1002288/

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Henderson, Sarah B., and Fay H. Johnston. 2012. “Measures of Forest Fire Smoke
Exposure and Their Associations with Respiratory Health Outcomes:” Current Opinion inAllergy and Clinical Immunology 12(3): 221–27. doi:10.1097/ACI.0b013e328353351f.
Hesseln, H., G.S. Amacher, and A. Deskin. 2010. “Economic Analysis of Geospatial
Technologies for Wildfire Suppression.” International Journal of Wildland Fire 19: 468477.
Holmes, T.P., and D.E. Calkin. 20134. “Econometric Analysis for Fire Suppression
Production Functions for Large Wildland Fires.” International Journal of Wildland Fire
22: 246-255.
Hoover, Katie and Kelsi Bracmort. “Wildfire Management: Federal Funding and Related
Statistics,” 2015. Congressional Research Service, R43077.
Hoover, Katie and Kelsi Bracmort. 2015. “Wildfire Management: Federal Funding andRelated Statistics,” Congressional Research Service, R43077.
Hougner, C., J. Colding, and T. Soderqvist. 2006. Economic valuation of a seed dispersal
service in the Stockholm National Urban Park, Sweden. Ecological Economics 59:364–
374.
Ice, George G., Daniel G. Neary, and Paul W. Adams. 2004. "Effects of wildfire on soils
and watershed processes." Journal of Forestry 102(6): 16-20.
Johnson, M. D., J. L. Kellermann, and A. M. Stercho. 2010. Pest reduction services bybirds in shade and sun coffee in Jamaica. Animal Conservation 13:140–147.
Johnson, Mark. 2015. “Military Flare during Training Exercise Ignites Massive Wildfire
at Camp Grayling.” Gaylord Herald Times. April 27.
<http://www.petoskeynews.com/gaylord/featured-ght/top-gallery/military-flare-duringtraining-exercise-ignites-massive-wildfire-at-camp/article_1681f36c-e65c-582d-8c57c94adc7b87f7.html>
Johnston, Fay H., et al. 2012. "Estimated global mortality attributable to smoke fromlandscape fires." Environmental Health Perspectives 120(5): 695.
Jones, Benjamin et al. 2016. “Wildfire Smoke Health Costs: A Methods Case Study for aSouthwestern US ‘Mega-Fire’.” Journal of Environmental Economics and Policy. 5(2):181-199. http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/21606544.2015.1070765

57

Kates, R. W., C. E. Colten, S. Laska and S. P. Leatherman. 2006. "Reconstruction of
New Orleans after Hurricane Katrina: a research perspective." Proceedings of the
National Academy of Sciences 103(40): 14653-14660.
Katsavouni, F., et al. 2015. "The relationship between burnout, PTSD symptoms andinjuries in firefighters." Occupational Medicine 66(1): 32-37.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Katuwal, H., D.E. Calkin, and M.S. Hand. 2016. “Production and Efficiency of Large
Wildland Fire Suppression Effort: A Stochastic Frontier Analysis.” Journal ofEnvironmental Management 166: 227-236.
Kellermann, J. L., M. D. Johnson, A. M. Stercho, and S. C. Hackett. 2008. Ecologicaland economic services provided by birds on Jamaican Blue Mountain coffee farms.
Conservation Biology 22:1177–1185.
Kent, Brian et al. 2003. “Social and Economic Issues of the Hayman Fire.” USDA Forest
Service Gen. Tech. Rep. RMRS-GTR-114. 2003.
https://www.fs.usda.gov/treesearch/pubs/14904
Kochi, Ikuho, et al. 2010. "The economic cost of adverse health effects from wildfiresmoke exposure: a review." International Journal of Wildland Fire 19(7): 803-817.
Kochi, Ikuho, et al. 2012. "Valuing mortality impacts of smoke exposure from major
southern California wildfires." Journal of Forest Economics 18(1): 61-75.
Kostas D. Kalabokidis. 2000. Effects of Wildfire Suppression Chemicals on People andthe Environment – A Review. Global Nest: The International Journal. 2 (2): 129-137.
Kousky, Carolyn. 2012. Informing Climate Adaptation: A Review of the Economic Costsof Natural Disasters, their Determinants, and Risk Reduction Options. Discussion Paper.
RFF DP 12-28.
Kuligowski, Erica. 2016. "Burning down the silos: integrating new perspectives from thesocial sciences into human behavior in fire research." Fire and Materials. Special Issue
Paper. August 31. http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/fam.2392/pdf
Kyle, Gerard T., Gene L. Theodori, James D. Absher, and Jinhee. 2010. “The Influenceof Home and Community Attachment on Firewise Behavior.” Society & Natural
Resources. 23(11): 1075-1092.
Ledbetter, Kay. 2017 “Agriculture Damages from Wildfire Estimated at about $21
million.” AgriLife Today. March 15. <https://today.agrilife.org/2017/03/15/agriculturedamages-wildfire-estimated-21-million/>
Lee, Morgan. 2014. “Wildfires Cut off Power to Thousands.” May 14.
<http://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-power-outages-wildfires-2014may14htmlstory.html>

58

Lee, T. S., Falter, K., Meyer, P., Mott, J., & Gwynn, C. 2009. Risk factors associatedwith clinic visits during the 1999 forest fires near the Hoopa Valley Indian Reservation,
California, USA. International Journal of Environmental Health research, 19(5): 315-327.
Lindell, Michael, Jung Eun Kang, and Carla Prater. 2011. “The Logistics of Household
Hurricane Evacuation.” Natural Hazards. 58: 1093-1109.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Liu, Diane, et al. 1992. "The effect of smoke inhalation on lung function and airway
responsiveness in wildland fire fighters." American Review of Respiratory Disease 146:
1469-1469.
Liu, J.C., Pereira G., Uhl, S.A., Bravo, M.A., and Bell, M.L. 2015. A systematic reviewof the physical health impacts from non-occupational exposure to wildfire smoke.
Environmental Research 136: 120-132
Loomis, John, et al. 2000. "Measuring the total economic value of restoring ecosystemservices in an impaired river basin: results from a contingent valuation survey."
Ecological Economics 33(1): 103-117.
McCaffrey, Sarah, Alan Rhodes, and Melanie Stidham. 2015 “Wildfire Evacuation and
its Alternatives: Perspectives from Four United States’ Communities.” International
Journal of Wildland Fire. 24: 170-178.
Mangan, Richard J. 2007. Wildland firefighter fatalities in the United States: 1990-2006.
National Wildfire Coordinating Group. https://www.fs.fed.us/td///pubs/pdfpubs/pdf07512814/pdf07512814dpi72.pdf
Mangan, Richard. 1999. "Wildland Fire Fatalities in the United States."
https://www.fs.fed.us/fire/safety/ref_material/content/fatalities.pdf
McCaffrey, Sarah. “Crucial Factors Influencing Public Acceptance of Fuels Treatments.”
2009. http://www.treesearch.fs.fed.us/pubs/download/36075.pdf.
Mendes, Isabel, and Isabel Proença. 2011. "Measuring the social recreation per-day net
benefit of the wildlife amenities of a national park: a count-data travel-cost approach."
Environmental Management 48(5): 920.
Mendes, I. 2010. “A Theoretical Economic Model for Choosing Efficient Wildfire
Suppression Strategies.” Forest Policy and Economics 12: 323-329.
Mercer, D.E., J.P. Prestemon, D.T. Butry, and J.M. Pye. 2007. “Evaluating Alternative
Prescribed Burning Policies to Reduce Net Economic Damages from Wildfire.”
American Journal of Agricultural Economics 89(1): 63-77.
Mercer, D.E., and J.P. Prestemon. 2005. “Comparing Production Function Models for
Wildfire Risk Analysis in the Wildland-Urban Interface.” Forest Policy and Economics
7: 782-795.

59

Miller, C., and A.A. Ager. 2013. “A Review of Recent Advances in Risk Analysis for
Wildfire Management.” International Journal of Wildland Fire 22: 1-14.
Moody, John A., Deborah A. Martin, and Susan H. Cannon. 2008. "Post-wildfire erosion
response in two geologic terrains in the western USA." Geomorphology 95(3): 103-118.
Mooney, Chris. 2015. With a stunning 7 million acres burned so far, the U.S. wildfire
situation is looking dire. The Washington Post. August 19.
This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Moore, D., Copes, R., Fisk, R., Joy, R., Chan, K., & Brauer, M. 2006. Population healtheffects of air quality changes due to forest fires in British Columbia in 2003: estimatesfrom physician-visit billing data. Canadian Journal of Public Health/Revue Canadienne
de Sante'e Publique, 105-108.
Moore, W., McCarl, B., 1987. Off-site costs of soil erosion: a case study of theWillamette Valley. West. J. Agric. Econom. 12 (1): 42–49.
Moreira, F., F.X. Catry, F. Rego, and F. Bacao. 2010. “Size-Dependent Pattern ofWildfire Ignitions in Portugal: When Do Ignitions Turn into Big Fires?” LandscapeEcology 25: 1405-1417.
Morton, Douglas C., Megan E. Roessing, Ann E. Camp, and Mary L. Tyrrell. 2003.
Assessing the Environmental, Social, and Economic Impacts of Wildfire. GISF Research
Paper 001. <http://gisf.yale.edu/sites/default/files/files/wildfire_report(1).pdf>
Mueller, Julie M., John B. Loomis, and Armando González-Cabán. 2009. “Do RepeatedWildfires Change Homebuyers’ Demand for Homes in High-Risk Areas? A Hedonic
Analysis of the Short- and Long-Term Effects of Repeated Wildfires on House Prices inSouthern California.” Journal of Real Estate Finance and Economics. 38(2): 155-172.
DOI: 10.1007/s11146-007-9083-1.
National Association of Insurance Commissioners. “Statistical Compilation of AnnualStatement Information for Property/Casualty Insurance Companies in 2015.” 2017.
National Association of Insurance Commissioners. 2017 “Dwelling Fire, Homeowners
Owner-Occupied, and Homeowners Tenant and Condominium/Cooperative Unit
Owner’s Insurance Report: Data for 2014.”
National Association of Realtors. Existing-Home Sales.
<https://www.nar.realtor/topics/existing-home-sales>
National Fire and Aviation Management Web Applications (FAMWEB). SIT-209.
<https://fam.nwcg.gov/fam-web/>National Interagency Coordination Center. Wildland Fire Summary and Statistics Annual
Report: 2016.
https://www.predictiveservices.nifc.gov/intelligence/2016_Statssumm/annual_report_201
6.pdf

60

National Interagency Fire Center. “Prescribed Fires and Acres by Agency.”
https://www.nifc.gov/fireInfo/fireInfo_stats_prescribed.html. Accessed 10 July 2017.
National Interagency Fire Center. 2016. Wildland Fire Summary and Statistics Annual
Report.
https://www.predictiveservices.nifc.gov/intelligence/2016_Statssumm/intro_summary16.
pdf

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

National Wildlife Federation. 2017. “Ecosystem Services.”
https://www.nwf.org/Wildlife/Wildlife-Conservation/Ecosystem-Services.aspx
Neary, Daniel G., Gerald J. Gottfried, and Peter F. Ffolliott. 2003 "Post-wildfire
watershed flood responses." Proceedings of the 2nd International Fire Ecology
Conference, Orlando, Florida.
NFPA. 2014. “Intentional Fires,” April. http://www.nfpa.org/news-and-research/firestatistics-and-reports/fire-statistics/fire-causes/arson-and-juvenile-firesetting/intentionalfires
Pfurtscheller, C and R Schwarze. 2008. “Estimating the Costs of Emergency Services
During Flood Events.” 4th International Symposium on Flood Defence: Managing Flood
Risk, Reliability, and Vulnerability. Toronto, Canada.
Pimentel, David, et al. 1995. "Environmental and economic costs of soil erosion andconservation benefits." Science-AAAS-Weekly Paper Edition 267.5201: 1117-1122.
Pope III, C. Arden, et al. 2002. "Lung cancer, cardiopulmonary mortality, and long-term
exposure to fine particulate air pollution." Jama 287(9): 1132-1141.
Preisler, H.K. and A.L. Westerling. 2007. “Statistical Model for Forecasting Monthly
Large Wildfire Events in Western United States.” Journal of Applied Meteorology andClimatology 46: 1020-1030.
Prestemon, J.P., and D.T. Butry. 2005. “Time to Burn: Modeling Wildland Arson as an
Autoregressive Crime Function.” American Journal of Agricultural Economics 87(3):756-770.
Prestemon, J.P., J.M. Pye, D.T. Butry, T.P. Holmes, and D.E. Mercer. 2002.
“Understanding Broadscale Wildfire Risks in a Human-Dominated Landscape.” Forest
Science 48(4): 685-693.
Prestemon, J.P, K. Abt, and K. Gebert. 2008. “Suppression Cost Forecasts in Advance ofWildfire Season.” Forest Science 54(4): 381-396.
Prestemon, J.P., U. Shankar, A. Xiu, K. Talgo, D. Yang, E. Dixon IV, D. McKenzie, and
K.L. Abt. 2016. “Projecting Wildfire Area Burned in the South-Eastern United States,
2011-60.” International Journal of Wildland Fire 25: 715-729.

61

Rahman, Fauzeya. 2016. New Study Estimates 20 Percent of Firefighters have PTSD.
Houston Chronicle. Aug 17.
Ramanujan, Krishna. 2012. Insect pollinators contribute $29 billion to U.S. farm income.
Cornell. http://news.cornell.edu/stories/2012/05/insect-pollinators-contribute-29b-usfarm-income

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Rappold, Ana G., et al. 2012. "Cardio-respiratory outcomes associated with exposure to
wildfire smoke are modified by measures of community health." Environmental
Health 11(71): 1-9.
Richardson, L. A., P. A. Champ, and J. B. Loomis. 2012. “The Hidden Cost of Wildfires:
Economic Valuation of Health Effects of Wildfire Smoke Exposure in Southern
California.” Journal of Forest Economics. 18(1): 14–35.
Rideout, D.B., and P.N. Omi. 1990. “Alternative Expressions for the Economic Theory ofForest Fire Management.” Forest Science 36(3): 614-624.
Rittmaster, R., et al. 2006. "Economic analysis of health effects from forest fires."
Canadian Journal of Forest Research 36(4): 868-877.
Robin D. Calfee, Edward E. Little. 2003. Effects of a fire-retardant chemical to fatheadminnows in experimental streams. Environmental Science and Pollution Research
September, 10(5): 296–300
Robyn Adams and Dianne Simmons. 1999. Ecological Effects of Fire Fighting Foams
and Retardants. Conference Proceedings of the Australian Bushfire Conference, Albury,
July.
Rose, Adam, et al. 1997. "The regional economic impact of an earthquake: Direct andindirect effects of electricity lifeline disruptions." Journal of Regional Science 37(3):437-458.
Satterfield, Jamie. 2016. “Teens toying with matches started Tennessee wildfire,” USA
Today, Dec 9. http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2016/12/09/sourcesteens-toying-matches-started-tennessee-wildfire/95223326/
Simard, A.J. 1976. “Wildland Fire Management: The Economics of Policy Alternatives.”
Canadian Forest Service Technical Report 15. Ottawa, Ontario. 52 pages.
Sparhawk, W.N. 1925. “The Use of Liability Ratings in Planning Forest Fire Protection.”
Journal of Agricultural Research 30(8):693-792.
Stelloh, Tim. 2015. “Western Wildfires Trigger Evacuations in California, Oregon.”
NBC News. August 17. <http://www.nbcnews.com/storyline/western-wildfires/westernwildfires-evacuations-power-outages-heavy-smoke-n410761>

62

Stockmann, Keith, James Burchfield, Dave Calkin, and Tyron Venn. 2010. “Guiding
Preventative Wildland Fire Mitigation Policy and Decisions with an Economic Modeling
System.” Forest Policy and Economics. 12(2): 147-154.
Stockmann, Keith. 2007. “A Cost Effectiveness Analysis of Preventative Mitigation
Options for Wildland Urban Interface Homes Threatened by Wildfire.” Graduate Student
Theses, Dissertations, & Professional Papers. http://scholarworks.umt.edu/etd/260.

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Syphard, A.D., V.C. Radeloff, J.E. Keeley, T.J. Hawbaker, M.K. Clayton, S.I. Stewart,
and R.B. Hamer. 2007. “Human Influence on California Fire Regimes.” EcologicalApplications 17(5): 1388-1402.
Syphard, A.D., V.C. Radeloff, N.S. Keuler, R.S. Taylor, T.J. Hawbaker, S.I. Stewart, and
M.K. Clayton. 2008. “Predicting Spatial Patterns of Fire on a Southern California
Landscape.” International Journal of Wildland Fire 17: 602-613.
Tajitsu, Naomi, and Makiko Yamazaki. 2016. “Toyota, Other Major Japanese Firms hit
by Quake Damage, Supply Disruptions.” Reuters. April 17.
<http://www.reuters.com/article/us-japan-quake-toyota-idUSKCN0XE08O>
Thomas, Douglas and David Butry. 2011. Tracking the National Fire Problem: The Data
Behind the Statistics. NIST Technical Note 1717: 32-33.
<https://www.nist.gov/publications/tracking-national-fire-problem-data-behindstatistics>
Thomas, Douglas and David Butry. 2014 “Areas of the US Wildland-Urban Interface
Threatened by Wildfire During the 2001-2010 Decade.” Natural Hazards. 71(3): 15611585.
Thomas, Douglas S., and David T. Butry. 2012. "Wildland fires within municipal
jurisdictions." Journal of Forestry 110(1): 34-41.
Thompson, M.P. and D.E. Calkin. 2011. “Uncertainty and Risk in Wildland Fire
Management: A Review.” Journal of Environmental Management 92: 1895-1909.
US Army. “Integrated Wildland Fire Management Plan Overview.”<https://www.garrison.hawaii.army.mil/sbcteis/feis/Appendices/Appendix%20O.pdf>
US Census Bureau. Characteristics of New Single-Family Houses Sold. 2017.
https://www.census.gov/construction/chars/pdf/soldlotsize.pdf
U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics. 2016. Digest of
Education Statistics, 2014 (NCES 2016-006), Chapter 2.
US Department of Agriculture. 2015. USDA Offers Help to Fire-Affected Farmers andRanchers. September. <https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2015/09/15/usdaoffers-help-fire-affected-farmers-and-ranchers>

63

US Department of Agriculture. 2016. Fiscal Year 2017 Budget Overview. February. B-2.
https://www.fs.fed.us/sites/default/files/fy-2017-fs-budget-overview.pdf
US Forest Service. 2013. Silver Fire: Burned Area Emergency Response Team Executive
Summary. <https://www.fs.usda.gov/Internet/FSE_DOCUMENTS/stelprdb5430883.pdf>
USGS. USGS. Newsletter. 2006. https://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2006/3015/2006-3015.pdf

This publication is available free of charge from: https://doi.org/10.6028/NIST.SP.1215

Wei, Y., D. Rideout, and A. Kirsch. 2008. “An Optimization Model for Locating Fuel
Treatments Across a Landscape to Reduce Expected Fire Losses.” Canadian Journal ofForest Research 38: 868-877.
Wenny, Daniel G. et al. The Need to Quantify Ecosystem Services Provided By Birds.
American Ornithological Society.
Whitehead, John C. 2003. “One Million Dollars per Mile? The Opportunity Costs of
Hurricane Evacuation,” Ocean and Coastal Management. 46(11-12): 1069-1083.
Wiedinmyer, Christine, and Jason C. Neff. 2007. "Estimates of CO2 from fires in the
United States: implications for carbon management." Carbon Balance and Management2(1): 10.
Wolters, Erika Allen, Brent S. Steel, Daniel Weston, and Mark Brunson. 2017
“Determinants of Residential Firewise Behaviors in Central Oregon.” The Social Science
Journal. 54(2): 168-178.
Yang, J., H.S. He, and S.R. Shifley. 2008. “Spatial Controls of Occurrence and Spread ofWildland Fires in the Missouri Ozark Highlands.” Ecological Applications 18(5): 12121225.
Zawacki, William T., Allan Marsinko, and J. Michael Bowker. 2000. "A travel cost
analysis of nonconsumptive wildlife-associated recreation in the United States." Forest
Science 46(4): 496-506.
Zhuang, J. et al. (Forthcoming). ‘Measurement of the Economic Impact of Fire.’ National
Fire Protection Association.

64