1

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

Rocky Mountain Research Station

Research Note

United States Department of Agriculture

Forest Service

Rocky Mountain Research Station

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW

December 2011

Living with Wildfire in Larimer County, Colorado,

2007

Patricia A. Champ, Hannah Brenkert-Smith, and Nicholas Flores

Citation:

Champ, Patricia A.; Brenkert-Smith, Hannah; Flores, Nicholas. 

2011. Living with Wildfire in Larimer County, Colorado, 

2007. Res. Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain 

Research Station. 

27 p.

Authors:

Patricia A. Champ, U.S. Department of Agriculture Forest Service, 

Rocky Mountain Research Station, Fort Collins, Colorado.

Hannah Brenkert-Smith, Institute of Behavioral Science, 

University of Colorado, Boulder.

Nicholas Flores, Department of Economics, University of 

Colorado, Boulder.

Abstract: The devastating impact of wildfire on residents living in fire 

prone areas has become an all too common media story in recent 

years. While significant efforts have been made to inform residents in 

fire prone areas of the risk, it is not clear to what extent property owners are taking action to reduce risk. Likewise, we know little about 

what factors are related to taking action to reduce risk. In an effort 

to explore these issues further and to better characterize the wildland 

urban interface (WUI) residents of Larimer County, Colorado, a general 

population survey of WUI residents was implemented. The survey was 

designed to provide information regarding knowledge, concern, and 

activities related to wildfire and wildfire risk mitigation. Survey results 

suggest that word had gotten out about wildfire risk as most survey respondents knew about the risk when they decided to purchase a home 

in a fire prone area. Likewise, survey respondents expressed concern 

that a wildfire would damage their home or property. Completing more 

wildfire risk mitigation actions was found to be related to first-hand 

experience with wildfire and perceptions of wildfire risk.

Introduction

Wildfire and its associated impacts on residents living in fire 

prone areas is a common story in the media during the wildfire 

season. Wildfire risk in areas such as the Rocky Mountain West 

is exacerbated by the influx of individuals choosing to live in 

the area that is most susceptible to wildfires, the wildland-urban interface (WUI). While significant efforts have been made 

to inform new and existing residents in WUI areas of the risk, 

it is not clear how the message has resonated with the target 

population. In Colorado, Larimer County has promoted concerted efforts to educate WUI residents about wildfire risk and 

the actions they need to take to reduce the risk of losing their 

home to a fire. A previous qualitative study of five Larimer 

County WUI communities suggested that all wildfire information sources were not the same and that study participants 

preferred the one-on-one information sharing with a wildfire 

specialist (Brenkert-Smith and others 2005, 2006). The study 

also suggested that homeowners’ decisions to mitigate wildfire risk were complex. Considerations included homeowners’ 

understanding of the biophysical characteristics of the landscape around their homes, the level of wildfire risk reduction 

activities on neighboring properties, and perceptions of the effectiveness of wildfire risk mitigation activities.

In an effort to explore these issues further and to better 

characterize the WUI residents of Larimer County, a general 

population survey of WUI residents was implemented. Baseline 

information about homeowners in the Larimer County WUI 

and their perspectives on wildfire risk and efforts to mitigate 

that risk will facilitate long-term monitoring and management 

practices. The survey was designed to provide information 

regarding knowledge, concern, and activities related to wildfire and wildfire risk mitigation among homeowners living in 

the Larimer County WUI. This report summarizes the study 
2

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

design, the characteristics of the survey respondents, and the 

wildfire mitigation actions they have taken. In an effort to better understand homeowners’ decisions to mitigate wildfire risk, 

we describe relationships between taking wildfire risk-reducing 

actions and other survey measures such as demographic characteristics of the respondents, their experience with wildfire, and 

sources of information about wildfire.

Methods

The Survey

A survey instrument was developed to provide information 

on WUI homeowners and their efforts to reduce the risk of 

loss related to wildfires. The survey was sponsored by Larimer 

County and the University of Colorado. A copy of the survey 

can be found in Appendix A. The survey had seven sections designed to collect information on where respondents live, their 

experience with wildfire, actions taken by the respondents to 

reduce wildfire risk, attitudes about wildfire, social interactions 

(2 sections), and demographic characteristics.

Target Population and Sampling

Geo-coded data from the Larimer County Assessor’s Office, 

GIS software, and Larimer County fire hazard maps were 

used to develop a target population of approximately 13,880 

privately owned residential parcels that have some kind of 

building structure located on the property. From this sampling 

frame, a random sample of 1750 households was chosen.

Data Collection

The survey was administered to the sample of Larimer 

county residents in the summer of 2007. All potential participants were mailed a first class envelope with a letter of 

invitation to participate in the survey. Participants were given 

a choice of completing a web-based version of the survey or 

a paper survey. To participate on-line, respondents went to a 

web address provided in the letter of invitation. Those wanting 

to complete a paper survey returned a postage paid postcard 

that was included with the letter of invitation. They were sent 

a survey, a letter with instructions and thanks, and a postage 

paid envelope for returning the survey. A second mailing was 

sent to non-respondents approximately one week after the first 

mailing. A third and final mailing was sent to non-respondents 

approximately one week after the second mailing.

Participants who logged onto the website were able to 

complete the survey at their leisure. It took between 15 and 

20 minutes for most participants to complete the survey. The 

survey log was checked regularly, and the addresses of those 

who had completed the survey were removed from the mailing 

list for the second and/or third mailings.

Descriptive Results

Of the 1750 initial letters that were mailed, 845 were not 

deliverable. Online surveys were completed by 205 households, and mail surveys were completed by 121 households. 

The overall response rate was 36% ([121 + 205] / 905). The 

responses to almost all of the survey questions were statistically similar between the online and mail surveys. Just four 

questions had response distributions that were statistically different between mail and online survey respondents: (a) number 

of people under the age of 18 living in the current residence, 

(b) race, (c) employment status, and (d) age. The results summarized in the rest of this report are based on analyzing the 

online and mail survey data together.

Characteristics of the Survey Respondents

Very few of the survey respondents were less than 24 years 

old (<1%) or over 75 years old (< 9%). The average age of the 

respondents was 57 years old. Slightly more males responded 

(55%) than females and almost all of the survey respondents 

identified “white” as their racial group (97%). Seventy-nine 

percent of the respondents were married. The respondents 

were well-educated with 30% having advanced degrees. 

Compared to 2007 U.S. Census data for Larimer County, the 

survey respondents were more educated than Larimer County, 

as a whole (70% of the study population were at least college 

graduates compared to 40% for Larimer County). However, 

median income appeared to be similar for the study population and Larimer County, as a whole, with a median household 

income around $50,000.

Place of Residence

While some WUI areas have many seasonal residents, that 

does not appear to be the case for the Larimer County WUI. 

Most survey respondents were full-time residents (89%). As 

might be expected, most of the part-time residents occupied 

their home in the Larimer WUI during the summer (97%). 

Few of the respondents (21%) expected to move within the 

next five years. There were very few renters among the survey respondents as 98% of the survey respondents owned their 

home and almost all of the survey respondents said they have 

homeowner’s or renter’s insurance (98%). Most households included pets (73%), but only 9% included income generating 

livestock. Land parcel sizes ranged from less than a quarter acre 
3

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

to 750 acres. Most of the survey respondents (64%) live on 

land parcels that were over 2 acres in size.

Neighbors

In the survey section that asked about social interactions, 

respondents were also asked about the density of vegetation on 

their property and neighboring properties when they moved in 

and currently. Approximately 38% of the respondents said the 

vegetation on their property was dense when they moved in, 

compared to 16% who said the current vegetation was dense. 

Interestingly, 34% of the respondents said the neighboring 

properties were dense when they moved in and 28% said those 

properties currently had dense vegetation. In other words, survey respondents report reducing the vegetation density on their 

property, but they reported a smaller reduction in vegetation 

density on neighboring properties.

Experience with Wildfire

Very few survey respondents had first-hand experience with 

a wildfire on their property (2%). However, 75% had experienced a wildfire fewer than 10 miles away from their property. 

Likewise, 12% of the survey respondents had evacuated their 

current residence due to a wildfire and 23% had prepared to 

evacuate. Most respondents (77%) did not know anyone whose 

residence was lost or damaged due to a wildfire. However, most 

of the survey respondents (88%) said they were somewhat or 

very aware of wildfire risk when they bought their current 

residence.

Attitudes Toward Wildfire

We examined attitudes toward wildfire by considering respondents’ levels of concern about what might be damaged by 

a wildfire (Table 1). Concern was measured on a 5-point scale 

with 1 = not at all concerned and 5 = extremely concerned. The 

highest level of concern was expressed about wildfire damaging 

respondents’ homes (average rating = 3.12). Survey respondents also expressed a somewhat higher level of concern that a 

wildfire would damage public lands (average rating = 2.88) and 

that wildfire would damage their property or landscape (average rating = 2.92). Respondents were least concerned about 

their ability to earn income being affected by a wildfire.

Attitudes were also measured with 17 statements about wildfire. Respondents were asked to rate how strongly they agree 

or disagree with each statement (1 = strongly agree, 2 = agree, 

3  =  neutral, 4 = disagree, 5 = strongly disagree) (Table  2). 

Responses tended to cluster around the middle of the scale 

(agree, neutral, or disagree) for the statement “Naturally occurring wildfire is not the problem, people who choose to live in 

fire prone areas are the problem.” Survey respondents seemed to 

understand that they are likely to experience a wildfire as 61% 

of the respondents disagreed or strongly disagreed with the 

statement that “A wildfire is unlikely to happen within the time 

period you expect to live here.” Likewise, survey respondents 

seemed to understand that their property is at risk of wildfire as 

78% disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement “Your 

property is not at risk of wildfire.” They also seemed to think 

that managing wildfire danger is their responsibility as 89% 

disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement “Managing 

the wildfire danger is a government responsibility, not yours.”

Perceptions of Wildfire Risk

We asked respondents how much they think vegetation on 

their property and the physical characteristics of their house 

contribute to the chances of a wildfire damaging their property in the next five years (1 = does not contribute; 5 = major 

contributor). Twenty-seven percent of respondents said they 

thought vegetation on their property was a contributor or a 

major contributor to the chances of a wildfire damaging their 

property. Fewer respondents (21%) said they thought the 

physical characteristics of their house contributed to chances 

of a wildfire damaging their property.

Table 1. Distribution of response to the question “How concerned are you about wildfire damaging or affecting the items listed below?”

1 = Not at 5 = Extremely

all concerned concerned Average Rating

Your house or other buildings on your 7% 20% 40% 20% 13% 3.12

property (n = 313)

Your property/landscape (n = 309) 15% 20% 35% 17% 13% 2.92

Public lands near your home (n = 311) 19% 19% 28% 22% 12% 2.88

Your health or your family’s health (n = 313) 24% 28% 30% 10% 9% 2.53

Local water sources (n = 313) 33% 27% 21% 10% 9% 2.35

Your pets and/or livestock (n = 309) 38% 21% 22% 10% 9% 2.33

Your ability to earn income (n = 310) 59% 20% 12% 5% 4% 1.76
4

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

Wildfire Risk Information Sources

Respondents were asked about two dimensions of wildfire 

risk information. They were asked about sources of information and confidence in the accuracy of the information source. 

Interestingly, the local fire department (49%) was the most 

frequently reported source of information about wildfire risk, 

and it was the information source with the highest rating with 

respect to confidence in the accuracy of the information. The 

second most commonly reported information source was the 

media (47%). However, survey respondents did not express 

much confidence in the accuracy of information about wildfire 

risk provided by the media. Neighborhood groups were reported as an information source by 33% of the survey respondents 

and were generally considered to provide accurate information. However, while “Neighbors, friends, or family members” 

was one of the more frequently reported information sources 

(30%), respondents expressed a relatively low level of confidence in the accuracy of information provided by those groups. 

Approximately 20% of respondents said they received information about reducing the risk of wildfire from the Colorado State 

Forest Service (24%), U.S. Forest Service (22%), and Larimer 

County (22%). All three of these information sources had high 

ratings in terms of confidence in the accuracy of information 

provided. In general the credibility of information sources was 

quite variable. Information sources that reach more homeowners such as newspapers, TV, and radio may not be particularly 

effective if homeowners do not have confidence in the accuracy 

of the information.

Taking Action

There are many actions a homeowner can take to mitigate 

the risk of wildfire, from thinning vegetation to installing a 

Table 2. Distribution of response to wildfire statements.

Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree

Naturally occurring wildfire is not the problem; people 7% 31% 25% 27% 10%

who choose to live in fire prone areas are the problem. 

(n = 306)

With proper technology, we can control most wildfires 4% 32% 28% 30% 6%

after they have started. (n = 305)

Wildfires that threaten human life should be put out. 52% 42% 5% 1% <1%

(n = 309)

Wildfires that threaten property should be put out. 30% 51% 15% 4% 0%

(n = 308)

During a wildfire, saving homes should be a priority over 24% 41% 22% 11% 1%

saving forests. (n = 307)

Wildfires are a natural part of the balance of a healthy 40% 46% 8% 4% 2%

forest/ecosystem. (n = 309)

You do not need to take action to reduce the risk of loss 2% 6% 9% 44% 40%

due to wildfire because the risk is not that great. 

(n = 310)

You do not have the time to implement wildfire risk <1% 8% 15% 52% 24%

reduction actions. (n = 306)

You do not have the money for wildfire risk reduction 3% 14% 22% 44% 17%

actions. (n = 303)

You do not need to act to reduce the risk of loss due to 1% 3% 5% 49% 42%

wildfire because you have insurance. (n = 310)

You live here for the trees and will not remove any of 2% 6% 17% 47% 27%

them to reduce fire risk. (n = 308)

A wildfire is unlikely to happen within the time period 2% 12% 25% 39% 22%

you expect to live here. (n = 308)

Managing the wildfire danger is a government 2% 1% 7% 55% 34%

responsibility, not yours. (n = 309)

Actions to reduce the risk of loss due to wildfire are 2% 3% 11% 56% 29%

not effective. (n = 307)

Your property is not at risk of wildfire. (n = 310) 2% 8% 12% 49% 29%

You don’t take action to reduce the risk of loss due to <1% 4% 8% 53% 34%

wildfire because if a wildfire reaches your property 

firefighters will protect your home. (n = 308)

You don’t take action because adjacent properties are 1% 5% 14% 53% 27%

not treated leaving your actions ineffective. (n = 303)
5

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

fire resistant roof. Based on Firewise recommendations and 

consultation with the Larimer County wildfire specialist, a 

list of 12 wildfire risk-reducing actions was included in the 

survey. Respondents were asked to circle the actions they had 

undertaken on their property. Only 5% of the survey respondents had not taken any of the actions. Therefore, it appears 

that wildfire risk mitigation is a matter of degree, not an all 

or nothing proposition. The action taken by the most respondents (71%) was “Mowed long grasses around the home to 

reduce wildfire risk.” Likewise, 70% of the survey respondents had installed a house number in a clearly visible place. 

Installing fire resistant siding on house or other buildings was 

the action taken least often (15%).

Determinants of 

Mitigation Actions

To better understand the factors related to mitigation levels, we examined the relationship between mitigation levels 

and other survey measures. We categorized respondents into 

groups based on the number of mitigation actions they reported implementing: low mitigators (implemented 0 to 4 

measures), mid-level mitigators (5 to 9 measures), and high 

mitigators (10 or more measures). We then conducted contingency table analyses to look at the relationship between 

mitigation levels and other survey measures.

Stated Considerations and Mitigation

Respondents were asked how much of a consideration 

expense, time, physical difficulty, lack of information and 

likelihood of a fire on their property were in their decision 

to take action to reduce wildfire risk (1 = not a consideration 

to 5  =  strong consideration). The perceived likelihood of a 

wildfire being on the property received the highest average 

response (mean rating = 3.42). Cost (mean rating = 2.87), 

physical difficulty (mean = 2.72), and time (mean = 2.63) had 

similar average ratings. Lack of information received the lowest mean score (mean = 2.13). However, low mitigators were 

more likely than mid-level or high mitigators to cite lack of 

information as a strong consideration when deciding to take 

action to reduce wildfire risk (Pearson’s chi-square = 12.693; 

p = 0.002). Likewise, financial expense was less likely to be a 

consideration for high mitigators compared to medium and 

low mitigators (Pearson’s chi-square = 5.333; p = 0.069).

Demographic Characteristics and Mitigation

With respect to age, we did not find that age quartiles and 

level of mitigation were related (Pearson’s chi-square = 9.474; 

p = 0.149). Likewise, despite the fact that women have been 

found to be more risk averse than men (Halek and Eisenhauer 

2001), gender was not found to be significantly related to the 

level of mitigation (Pearson’s chi-square = 3.398; p = 0.183). 

Fifteen percent of respondents reported that financial expense 

was a strong consideration when deciding whether or not to 

take action to reduce risk, and we cannot reject the hypothesis 

that there is a relationship between income and level of mitigation (Pearson’s chi-square = 29.441; p = 0.009).

Place of Residence and Mitigation

We did not find evidence of a statistically significant relationship between lot size and mitigation levels (Pearson’s chi-square 

= 3.543; p = 0.170). Nor did we find a statistically significant 

relationship (Pearson’s chi-square = 1.985; p = .371) between 

level of mitigation and plans to move in the next five years.

Experience with Wildfire and Mitigation

Consistent with some of the research on other natural hazards, past experience with wildfire appeared to play a role in 

how many wildfire risk reduction actions homeowner completed. Respondents who had been evacuated or who had prepared 

to evacuate reported higher levels of mitigation (Pearson’s chisquare = 6.027; p = 0.049). However, second hand experience 

in the form of knowing someone who had been evacuated was 

not related to higher levels of mitigation (Pearson’s chi-square = 

1.421; p = 0.491). While only eleven percent of the survey respondents were not aware of wildfire risk when they purchased 

their current residence, those who were aware had higher levels 

of mitigation (Pearson’s chi-square = 9.228; p = 0.010).

Attitudes and Mitigation

Of the seven items listed in Table 1 that could be affected 

in a wildfire, only one item was found to have a statistically 

significant relationship with mitigation level. Medium and 

high level mitigators expressed more concern about wildfire 

affecting public land near their home (Pearson’s chi-square = 

8.002; p = 0.018). With respect to other attitude measures, 

respondents who took more mitigation measures seemed to 

clearly understand that homeowners have a role in reducing 

wildfire risk. When asked to rate their strength of agreement 
6

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

on a 5-point scale (1 = strongly agree; 5 = strongly disagree) 

with a variety of statements about wildfire risk, we saw some 

interesting results. Compared to low mitigators, mid-level and 

high mitigators were more likely to disagree with the following 

statements:

•	 You do not need to take action to reduce the risk of loss due 

to wildfire because the risk is not that great.

•	 You do not have the time to implement wildfire risk 

reduction actions.

•	 You do not have the money for wildfire risk reduction 

actions.

•	 You do not need to act to reduce the risk of loss due to 

wildfire because you have insurance.

•	 A wildfire is unlikely to happen within the time period you 

expect to live here.

•	 Your property is not at risk of wildfire.

•	 You don’t take action to reduce the risk of loss due to wildfire 

because if a wildfire reaches your property firefighters will 

protect your home.

It appears that individuals who undertake higher levels of wildfire risk reduction understand that they are at risk of losing 

their home to a wildfire and that the fire department may not 

be able to save their home.

Perceptions of Wildfire Risk and Mitigation

We examined the relationship between perceived contributors to wildfire risk and wildfire risk mitigation actions taken. 

The perception that vegetation on homeowner’s own property 

contributed a lot to the chances of a wildfire damaging their 

property was not related to mitigation level (Pearson chi-square 

= 1.376; p = 0.502). However, respondents who thought the 

physical characteristics of their property (other than vegetation) 

were a major contributor to the chances of wildfire damaging their property, were more likely to be med-level or high 

mitigators (Pearson chi-square = 6.999; p = 0.030). Likewise, 

respondents who said they thought human activity was a major 

contributor to a wildfire starting on their property were more 

likely to be mid-level or high mitigators (Pearson chi-square = 

11.765; p = 0.003) as were those who said the vegetation on 

their neighbors’ properties were major contributors.

Wildfire Risk Information 

Sources and Mitigation

Compared to the low mitigators, the mid-level and high 

mitigators were more likely to have received wildfire information from the local fire department, a neighborhood group, the 

Larimer County Wildfire Specialist, the Colorado State Forest 

Service, or the U.S. Forest Service.

Expectations Related to a 

Wildfire Event

The survey posed several questions about expectations and 

understandings of wildfire. Though the responses to those 

questions may not appear to be related to taking more mitigation action to reduce risk, they do shed some light on how 

survey respondents understand wildfire. For example, survey 

respondents were asked how likely they thought it would be 

that their home would be destroyed and that their trees and 

landscape would burn if a wildfire were to occur on their property. Only 33% of the respondents said they thought it was 

likely that their home would be destroyed, while 72% said they 

thought their trees and landscape would be destroyed. It appears that this disparity comes from the perception by 50% of 

the respondents said that if a wildfire were to occur on their 

property, the fire department would save their home. These expectations may be linked to attitudes reported earlier regarding 

wildfire management.

Conclusions

The results described in this report paint an interesting picture of Larimer County. The survey respondents represent a 

stable population in the sense that most were full-time residents who did not plan to move in the next five years. They 

were more educated than Larimer County, as a whole (70% 

of the study population were at least college graduates compared to 40% of Larimer County). However, median income 

appeared to be similar for the study population and Larimer 

County, as a whole.

It seems that word had gotten out about wildfire risk because most survey respondents knew about the risk when they 

decided to purchase a home in a fire prone area. Likewise, survey respondents were concerned that a wildfire would damage 

their home or property. Most realized that a wildfire is likely to 

occur while they live at their current residence; and most disagreed or strongly disagreed with the statement “Managing the 

wildfire danger is a government responsibility, not yours.” Very 

few of the respondents had first-hand experience with wildfire 

on their property.

However, concern and awareness about wildfire risk do not 

necessarily translate directly into taking action. While very few 

respondents had done nothing to mitigate the risk of wildfire 
7

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

on their property, there appears to be room for taking more 

action. The action taken by the most respondents was “Mowed 

long grasses around the home to reduce wildfire risk.” Likewise, 

most of the survey respondents had installed a house number 

in a clearly visible place. Installing fire resistant siding on the 

house or other buildings was the action taken least often.

One of the goals of this study was to provide a better understanding of factors related to higher mitigation levels. We 

found that past experience with wildfire, in the sense of having 

been evacuated or prepared to evacuate, is related to higher 

mitigation levels. Likewise, the individuals who knew about 

wildfire risk when they purchased their home also had higher 

mitigation levels. We also found that homeowners who undertake higher levels of mitigation perceived a higher level of risk. 

High mitigation was also associated with getting information 

from the local fire department, a neighborhood group, the 

Larimer County Wildfire Specialist, the Colorado State Forest 

Service or the U.S. Forest Service. While many respondents 

said they got information about wildfire risk from general media sources, that information sources was not related to taking 

more action.

References

Brenkert, H.; Champ, P.; Flores, N. 2005. Mitigation of wildfire 

risk by homeowners. Fort Collins, CO: U.S. Department 

of Agriculture, Forest Service, Rocky Mountain Research 

Station. Res. Note RMRS-RN-25WWW. 9 p.

Brenkert-Smith, H.; Champ, P.A.; Flores, N. 2006. Insights 

into wildfire mitigation decisions among wildland-urban 

interface residents. Society and Natural Resources 19(8): 

759-768.

Halek, M. and J.G. Eisenhauer. 2001. Demography of Risk 

Aversion. Journal of Risk and Insurance 68(1): 1-24.
8

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

Appendix A. Survey Questions and Responses

Living with Wildfire in Colorado

University of Colorado at Boulder

ID (6 digits); 

VERSION (n=326) 0=mail; 1=web; 37% mail; 63% web

COUNTY 0=Boulder; 1=Larimer;

Key: Red all caps are variable names

 n= number of observations
9

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

1

Section 1: In the first section, we ask questions about where you live. If you own multiple 

homes, please answer the following questions with respect to the location where the survey was 

mailed. We refer to this home as your current residence. 

Blue numbers are percent responses.

OWNRENT (n= 315)

1. Do you own or rent your current residence? (Circle one number)

98% 1 Own

2% Rent  In what year did you move into your current residence? RENTMOVE 

(n=5) mean=2003

TYPE1 (n=316 )

2. Which of the following best describes your current residence? (Circle one number)

98.1% 1 Single family home

.6% 2 Condominium or townhouse

.9% 3 Mobile home or trailer

.3% 4 Apartment building

LIVERES (n=314)

3. Do you live in your current residence full time or part time? (Circle one number)

90% 1 Full time  In what year did you assume full time residence? FULLTIME 

(n=190) mean=1995

10% 2 Part time  What season(s) do you reside at your current residence? (Circle all 

that apply)

(n=33)

67% 1 Spring SPRING

97% 2 Summer SUMMER

76% 3 Fall FALL

33% 4 Winter WINTER

YRBUILD (n=312)

4. In what year was your current residence originally built? (Fill in the blank)

mean=1981 Year current residence was built

INSURE (n=317)

5. Do you have homeowner’s or renter’s insurance? (Circle one number)

3% 1 No

97% 2 Yes

6. Including yourself, how many people live in your current residence? (Fill in the blank)

OVER18 (n=315) mean=2 Number of people over the age of 18 living in your current 

residence

UNDER18 (n=197) mean=.43 Number of people under the age of 18 living in your current 

residence
10

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

2

PETS (n=315)

7. Do you have pets or non- income generating livestock at your residence? (Circle one 

number)

27% 1 No

73% 2 Yes 

LIVEST (n=315)

8. Do you have income generating livestock on this property? (Circle one number)

91% 1 No 

9% 2 Yes 

LOTSIZE (n=315)

9. What size is your parcel?

3% 1 Around 1⁄4 acre or less (1/4 acre = 10,890 square feet)

33% 2 1⁄4 acre to 2 acres

64% 3 Larger than 2 acres How many acres is your lot? ACRES (n=192) mean=28

NEAREST (n=315)

10. What is the distance from your house to the nearest house or building that lies outside your 

property line? (Circle one number)

4% 1 Less than 25 feet

22% 2 25 – 100 feet

74% 3 More than 100 feet

MOVE1 (n=316)

11. Do you expect to sell your property or move away in the next five years? (Circle one 

number)

79% 1 No

21% 2 Yes Why might you move?___________________________________
11

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

3

FIRE (n=314)

1. Since you have lived at your current residence, what is the closest a wildfire has come to your 

property? (Circle one number)

2% 1 There has been a wildfire on your property  How many? NOFIRE (n=8) 

mean=1.14

72% 2 Less than 10 miles

20% 3 More than 10 miles away

5% 4 Not sure

DAMAGE (n=315)

2. Has your current residence ever been damaged by a wildfire or smoke from wildfire? (Circle 

one number)

97% 1 No

3% 2 Yes

EVACUATE (n=314)

3. Have you ever been evacuated from your current residence due to a wildfire or threat of 

wildfire or received a reverse 911 call to prepare to evacuate? (Circle one number)

65% 1 No

12% 2 Yes, evacuated

23% 3 Yes, prepared to evacuate

PREVIOUS (n=314)

4. Have you ever faced a wildfire threat at a previous residence (in Colorado or elsewhere)? 

(Circle one number)

84% 1 No

16% 2 Yes

5. Do you personally know anyone who has been evacuated from her/his residence due to a 

wildfire? (Circle all that apply)

(n=326); % reported is % circled

KNOW1 41% 1 No, you don’t know anyone who was ever evacuated 

KNOW2 43% 2 Yes, you know someone who was evacuated in the last 5 years

KNOW3 15% 3 Yes, you know someone who was evacuated more than 5 years ago.

Section 2: We would like to know about your experiences with wildfire. Even if you have not ever 

experienced a wildfire, please answer the following questions. Please do not include prescribed 

burns in your answers unless they were prescribed burns that escaped control.
12

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

4

6. Do you personally know anyone whose residence has been damaged or lost due to a wildfire? 

(Circle all that apply)

(n=326); % reported is % circled

77% 1 No, you don’t know anyone whose residence has been damaged or lost due to a 

wildfire LOST1

14% 2 Yes, you know someone whose residence has been damaged or lost in the last 5 

years LOST2

6% 3 Yes, you know someone whose residence has been damaged or lost more than 5 

years ago LOST3

RISKAWAR (n=314)

7. How aware of wildfire risk were you when you bought or decided to rent your current 

residence or property? (Circle one number)

11% 1 Not aware

36% 2 Somewhat aware

52% 3 Very aware

1% 4 Don’t remember

PROPRISK (n=314)

8. Are there characteristics or features on your property that you think make it particularly 

susceptible to wildfire? (Circle one number)

46% 1 No

50% 2 Yes  Please explain: _____________________________________ 

4% 3 Don’t know

9. How much do you think the vegetation and building materials on your property contributed to 

the wildfire risk when you moved into your current residence? (Circle one number for each 

item) 

Did not 

contribute 

to wildfire 

risk

Contributed 

a lot to 

wildfire risk

Don’t 

Know

Vegetation on property when purchased or 

decided to rent VEGMOVE (n=313) 13% 13% 29% 14% 26% 5%

Roofing, siding, or deck materials when 

purchased or decided to rent ROOFMOVE 

(n=311)

25% 14% 32% 10% 13% 6%

In the following questions, please think of vegetation as any kind of plant, such as grasses, 

shrubs, and trees. 
13

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

5

10. How much do you think each of the following factors contributes to the chances of a 

wildfire damaging your property in the next 5 years? (Circle one number for each item)

Does not 

contribute

Major 

contributor Don’t Know

Vegetation on your property CONTRIB1 

(n=314) 10% 20% 36% 15% 19% 1%

Physical characteristics of your property 

other than vegetation (e.g., steep inclines) 

CONTRIB2 (n=314)

23% 20% 28% 11% 16% 2%

Physical characteristics of your house or 

other buildings (e.g., roofing or siding) 

CONTRIB3 (n=314)

22% 21% 34% 12% 9% 1%

Vegetation on your neighbors’ properties 

CONTRIB4 (n=311) 14% 14% 26% 21% 24% 1%

Vegetation on nearby National Forest or 

National Park CONTRIB5 (n=310) 25% 9% 14% 18% 26% 7%

Vegetation on other nearby public land 

(e.g., Open Space or greenbelt) 

CONTRIB6 (n=309)

29% 11% 19% 15% 18% 8%

Human activity CONTRIB7 (n=314) 8% 12% 20% 17% 41% 2%

Weather-related natural starts (e.g.,

lightning) CONTRIB8 (n=311) 2% 7% 21% 26% 43% 1%

Availability of roads for you to exit 

community and emergency vehicles to 

enter community CONTRIB9 (n=313)

28% 18% 20% 11% 20% 3%

11. How concerned are you about wildfire damaging or affecting the items listed below?

(Circle one number for each statement)

Not at all 

concerned

Extremely 

concerned

Your house or other buildings on 

your property CONCERN1 (n=313) 7% 20% 40% 20% 13%

Your health or your family’s health 

CONCERN2 (n=313) 24% 28% 30% 10% 9%

Your ability to earn income CONCERN3 

(n=310) 59% 20% 12% 5% 4%

Your pets and/or livestock CONCERN4 

(n=309) 38% 21% 22% 10% 9%

Your property/landscape CONCERN5 (n=309) 15% 20% 35% 17% 13%

Local water sources CONCERN6 (n=313) 33% 27% 21% 10% 9%

Public lands near your home CONCERN7 

(n=311) 19% 19% 28% 22% 12%

Other (please specify):

CONCERN8 (n=44) 59% 0% 11% 9% 21%
14

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

6

% reported is % circled

(n=326)

1. Since moving in, have you done any of the following on your property? (Circle all that apply)

1 Pruned limbs so lowest is 6-10 feet from the ground in within a 30 foot perimeter from 

your house or other buildings LIMB30 51%

2 Pruned limbs so lowest is 6-10 feet from the ground in the area 30-100 feet from your 

house or other buildings LIMBGT30 37%

3 Removed dead or overhanging branches in area within a 30 foot perimeter around your 

house or other buildings BR30 62%

4 Removed dead or overhanging branches in the area 30-100 feet from your house or other 

buildings BRGT30 46%

5 Thinned trees and shrubs within a 30 foot perimeter around house or other buildings 

THIN30 48%

6 Thinned trees and shrubs in area 30–100 feet from your house or other buildings

THINGT30 36%

7 Installed a fire resistant roof ROOF 46%

8 Installed fire resistant siding on house or other buildings SIDE 15%

9 Installed screening over roof vents SCREEN 22%

10 Installed house number in clearly visible place NUMBER 70%

11 Cleared leaves and pine needles from the roof and/or yard to reduce wildfire risk 

LEAVESF 57%

12 Cleared leaves and pine needles from the roof and/or yard to improve the appearance of 

the property LEAVES 45%

13 Mowed long grasses around the home to reduce wildfire risk MOWF 71%

14 Mowed long grasses around the home to improve the appearance of the property MOW 

60%

15 None of the above  Skip to Question 8 NONE 5%

Section 3: In this section, we are interested in the kinds of changes that have been made to your 

house, other buildings on your property, or the land surrounding your home. We are also 

interested in any changes you might have made to reduce wildfire risk.
15

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

7

2. Of the actions you reported taking in the previous question, please list the number of each 

item you undertook with wildfire risk reduction in mind. (List the item numbers circled in 

Question 1 that were undertaken specifically for the purposes of reducing wildfire risk).

TIMEH (n=294)

3. In the last twelve months, how much time would you estimate members of your household 

including yourself or anyone who may have helped you, have spent working on your house or 

other buildings on your property to reduce the chances of losing your home due to a wildfire? 

(Circle one number)

21% 1 0 hours

48% 2 1 – 20 hours

12% 3 21 – 40 hours

19% 4 more than 40 hours

MONEYH (n=292)

4. In the last twelve months, how much money would you estimate members of your household 

including yourself or anyone who may have helped you, have spent working on your house or 

other buildings on your property to reduce the chances of losing your home due to a wildfire? 

(Circle one number)

57% 1 0 - $100

24% 2 $101 - $500

8% 3 $501 - $1000

11% 4 $1001 or more

TIMEP (n=294)

5. In the last twelve months, how much time would you estimate members of your household 

including yourself or anyone who may have helped you, have spent working on your property

surrounding your home to reduce the chances of losing your home due to a wildfire? (Circle 

one number)

13% 1 0 hours

50% 2 1 – 20 hours

15% 3 21 – 40 hours

23% 4 more than 40 hours

MONEYP (n=291)

6. In the last twelve months, how much money would you estimate members of your household 

including yourself or anyone who may have helped you, have spent working on your property

surrounding your home to reduce the chances of losing your home due to a wildfire? (Circle 

one number)

56% 1 0 - $100

30% 2 $101 - $500

7% 3 $501 - $1000

8% 4 $1001 or more
16

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

8

INVEST (n=281)

7. Beyond the time and money reported in the previous four questions, are there any other 

significant investments (of time or money) that you made to your property (land or house) in 

order to reduce the risk of losing your home due to wildfire since you bought your property or 

started to rent? 

73% 1 No

27% 2 Yes  Please explain: 

EVACPLAN (n=307)

8. Do you currently have an evacuation plan in the event of a wildfire threatening your home or 

property? (Circle one number)

34% 1 No

66% 2 Yes

EMERPLAN (n=307)

9. Do you currently have any emergency plan for reducing the risk of losing your home due to a 

wildfire that you would implement in the event of a wildfire threatening your home? (e.g.,

cutting trees, mowing lawn, using fire retardant) (Circle one number)

58% 1 No

42% 2 Yes  Please explain: 

10. When deciding whether to take action to reduce the risk of loss due to wildfire on your 

property, how much of a consideration is each of the following items? (Circle one number for 

each)

Not a 

consideration

Strong

consideration

Financial expense/ Cost of taken action

CONSID1 (n=306) 23% 12% 37% 13% 15%

Time it takes to implement actions

CONSID2 (n=302) 24% 18% 36% 14% 8%

Physical difficulty of doing the work

CONSID3 (n=303) 26% 17% 31% 12% 14%

Lack of specific information about how

To reduce risk CONSID4 (n=300) 45% 19% 20% 10% 6%

The likelihood of a wildfire being on your 

property CONSID5 (n=305) 11% 10% 34% 18% 27%
17

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

9

11. From which of the following sources have you received information from about reducing the 

risk of wildfire? (Circle all that apply)

% reported is % circled

(n=326)

49% 1 Local Fire Department SOURCE1 

33% 2 Neighborhood group (homeowners group, local board, etc.) SOURCE2

30% 3 Neighbors, friends, or family members SOURCE3

47% 4 Media (newspaper, TV, radio, internet) SOURCE4

22% 5 County wildfire specialist SOURCE5

24% 6 Colorado State Forest Service SOURCE6

22% 7 U.S. Forest Service SOURCE7

9% 8 National Park Service SOURCE8

2% 9 Front Range Fuels Treatment Partnership SOURCE9

15% 10 Other  Please describe: SOURCE10

10% 11 None of the above, you have not received any information about wildfire risk. 

SOURCE11

12. How much confidence do you have in the accuracy of wildfire risk information 

provided by the following sources? (Circle one for each group or person)

No

Confidence

A lot of 

confidence

Local fire department SCON1 

(n=297) 2% 5% 18% 20% 54%

Neighborhood group 

(homeowners group, local

board, etc.) SCON2 (n=261)

15% 16% 31% 18% 20%

Neighbors, friends, or family

Members SCON3 (n=269) 6% 22% 38% 20% 14%

Media (newspaper, TV, radio,

internet) SCON4 (n=280) 11% 15% 42% 19% 13%

Larimer County wildfire safety 

specialist SCON5 (n=269) 6% 7% 18% 21% 48%

Colorado State Forest Service

SCON6 (n=276) 5% 8% 17% 23% 48%

U.S. Forest Service SCON7 

(n=272) 7% 6% 16% 26% 45%

National Park Service SCON8 

(n=250) 9% 9% 20% 24% 38%

Front Range Fuels Treatment

Partnership SCON9 (n=192) 21% 11% 26% 16% 26%

Other: SCON10 (n=18) 22% 11% 17% 17% 33%
18

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

10

1. If there is a wildfire on your property, how likely do you think it is that the following would 

occur? (Circle one number for each item)

Not 

Likely

Very 

Likely

You would put the fire out. 

LACT1(n=302) 23% 23% 27% 9% 18%

The fire department would save your 

home. LACT2 (n=308) 8% 10% 32% 21% 29%

There would be some smoke 

damage to your home. LACT3 (n=306) 5% 7% 32% 17% 40%

There would be some physical 

damage to your home. LACT4 (n=305) 4% 14% 35% 17% 29%

Your home would be destroyed. 

LACT5 (n=305) 21% 25% 29% 10% 15%

You would suffer financial losses due 

to the loss of business/income on your 

property. LACT6 (n=265)

42% 15% 15% 5% 16%

Your trees and landscape would 

Burn. LACT7 (n=303) 3% 9% 23% 18% 47%

Your pets would be harmed (include 

non-income generating livestock). 

LACT8 (n=263)

36% 21% 24% 7% 6%

You would suffer financial losses due 

to the loss of income generating 

livestock. LACT9 (n=195)

66% 5% 5% 2% 1%

Your crops would be damaged or lost 

(including trees). LACT10 (n=220) 42% 6% 13% 8% 16%

Your neighbors’ homes would be 

damaged or destroyed. LACT11 

(n=294)

8% 14% 36% 17% 24%

Your community water supply would 

be threatened. LACT12 (n=269) 36% 220% 22% 5% 10%

The fire would spread to nearby 

public lands. LACT13 (n=288) 16% 9% 22% 17% 33%

Section 4: In this section, we are interested in your perspectives and opinions about issues such as 

wildfire, wildfire management, and the environment. There are no correct or incorrect answers.
19

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

11

2. How much do you agree or disagree with the following statements about wildfire? (Circle 

one number for each statement)

Strongly 

Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly 

Disagree

Naturally occurring wildfire is not the 

problem; people who choose to live in fire

prone areas are the problem. STATE1 (n=306)

7% 31% 25% 27% 10%

With proper technology, we can control most

wildfires after they have started. STATE2 (n=305) 4% 32% 28% 30% 6%

Wildfires that threaten human life should be

put out. STATE3 (n=309) 52% 42% 5% 1% <1%

Wildfires that threaten property should be put

out. STATE4 (n=308) 30% 51% 15% 4% 0%

During a wildfire, saving homes should be a

priority over saving forests. STATE5 (n=307) 24% 41% 22% 11% 1%

Wildfires are a natural part of the balance of a 

healthy forest/ecosystem. STATE6 (n=309) 40% 46% 8% 4% 2%

You do not need to take action to reduce the risk of loss 

due to wildfire because the risk is not that great. STATE7 

(n=310)

2% 6% 9% 44% 40%

You do not have the time to implement wildfire risk 

reduction actions. STATE8 (n=306) <1% 8% 15% 52% 24%

You do not have the money for wildfire risk reduction 

actions. STATE9 (n=303) 3% 14% 22% 44% 17%

You do not need to act to reduce the risk of loss due to 

wildfire because you have insurance. STATE10 (n=310) 1% 3% 5% 49% 42%

You live here for the trees and will not remove any of them 

to reduce fire risk. STATE11 (n=308) 2% 6% 17% 47% 27%

A wildfire is unlikely to happen within the time period you 

expect to live here. STATE12 (n=308) 2% 12% 25% 39% 22%

Managing the wildfire danger is a government 

responsibility, not yours. STATE13 (n=309) 2% 1% 7% 55% 34%

Actions to reduce the risk of loss due to wildfire are not 

effective. STATE14 (n=307) 2% 3% 11% 56% 29%

Your property is not at risk of wildfire. STATE15 (n=310) 2% 8% 12% 49% 29%

You don’t take action to reduce the risk of loss due to 

wildfire because if a wildfire reaches your property 

firefighters will protect your home. STATE16 (n=308)

<1% 4% 8% 53% 34%

You don’t take action because adjacent properties are not 

treated leaving your actions ineffective STATE17 (n=303) 1% 5% 14% 53% 27%
20

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

12

3. How much do you agree or disagree with the following statements about the relationship 

between humans and the environment? (Circle one number for each statement)

Strongly 

Agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly Disagree

We are approaching the limit of the number 

of people the earth can support. NEP1 

(n=308)

26% 26% 20% 22% 6%

Humans have the right to modify the natural 

environment to suit their needs. NEP2 

(n=308)

3% 18% 24% 42% 13%

When humans interfere with nature it often 

produces disastrous consequences. NEP3 

(n=308)

24% 46% 18% 10% 3%

Humans are severely abusing the 

environment. NEP4 (n=308) 35% 35% 15% 10% 4%

The earth has plenty of natural resources if 

We just learn how to develop them. NEP5 

(n=308)

8% 31% 17% 32% 13%

Despite our special abilities humans are still 

subject to the laws of nature. NEP6 (n=308) 51% 46% 2% <1% 0%

Humans were meant to rule over the rest of 

nature. NEP7 (n=308) 4% 10% 16% 31% 38%

The balance of nature is very delicate and 

Easily upset. NEP8 (n=308) 30% 44% 15% 9% 3%

Humans will eventually learn enough 

about how nature works to be able to 

control it. NEP9 (n=307)

1% 6% 19% 46% 29%

If things continue on their present course, 

we will soon experience a major ecological 

catastrophe. NEP10 (n=307)

24% 33% 24% 13% 7%
21

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

13

1. How many of each of the following types of neighboring properties (properties that 

share a property line) do you have? (Fill in the blanks)

mean=2.65 Full time residential (owner occupied or rental) FTRES

mean=1.08 Seasonal/ part time residential (owner occupied or rental) PTRES

mean=.31 Vacant residence VACANT

mean=1.23 Undeveloped private land UNDEV

mean=.54 Publicly managed land (e.g., National Forest, National Park, State owned 

land, county or community land) PUBLIC

mean=.30 Other (Please specify): OTHER

mean=.01 Not sure what type of properties neighbor yours NOTSURE

2. How often do you interact with your neighbors (residents or land managers)? (Circle 

all that apply)

% reported is % circled

(n=326)

14% 1 Daily INTER1

40% 2 Weekly INTER2

37% 3 Monthly INTER3

19% 4 Yearly INTER4

3% 5 Never  Skip to Question 5 INTER5

3. In general, how would you characterize the tone of these interactions? (Circle all that 

apply)

(n=315)

80% 1 Positive with most neighbors POSMOST

11% 2 Positive with a few neighbors POSFEW

5% 3 Negative with a few neighbors NEGFEW

<1% 4 Negative with most neighbors NEGMOST

TALKFIRE (n=296)

4. Have you ever talked about wildfire issues with a neighbor? (Circle one number)

29% 1 No 

71% 2 Yes 

NACTION (n=306)

5. Have any of your neighbors done anything to reduce the risk of wildfire on their 

property? (Circle one number)

20% 1 No Skip to Question 8

57% 2 Yes  Please describe: __________________________________

23% 3 Don’t know  Skip to Question 9

Section 5: In this section, please think about the properties directly across the road or alley and 

those that share a property line with yours. The following questions refer to these properties or to 

those who live there as your neighbors. If you share a property line with public land or land 

without homes or other buildings include anyone who manages this land (e.g., land managers) 

among the neighbors you consider when answering the following questions.
22

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

14

WHENNACT (n=175)

6. When did your neighbors undertake action(s) to reduce risk of wildfire on their 

property in relation to any actions you have undertaken? (Circle one number)

3% 1 I have not taken any action

7% 2 They took action beforeyou did

23% 3 They took action after you did

1% 4 They plan to take action

45% 5 We took action around the same time

20% 6 Don’t know 

WORKN (n=176)

7. Have you ever worked with any of your neighbors to reduce the risk of wildfire on 

your property or that of your neighbors? (Circle one number)

57% 1 No

8% 2 Yes, on your property

7% 3 Yes, on your neighbors’ properties

27% 4 Yes, on both

SLACKER (n=237)

8. Do you have any neighbors who are not taking action to address what you would 

consider sources of wildfire risk in the event of a wildfire (e.g., dense vegetation) on their 

property? (Circle one number)

33% 1 No

54% 2 Yes

14% 3 Don’t know

9. How would you describe the vegetation on your property and your neighbors’ 

properties? (Circle one number for each)

Very 

Sparse

Very 

Dense

When you first moved into your house, the 

vegetation on your property was...VEG1 (n=306) 9% 11% 42% 23% 15%

Currently, the vegetation on your property is... 

VEG2 (n=307) 7% 27% 49% 12% 4%

When you first moved in, the vegetation on 

most of the properties neighboring yours

was...VEG3 (n=305)

5% 15% 46% 19% 15%

Currently, the vegetation on most of the 

properties neighboring yours is...VEG4 (n=307) 3% 19% 50% 19% 9%
23

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

15

% reported is % circled

(n=326)

1. How often do you participate in social groups or activities (e.g., potlucks, parties, 

book groups, etc.) with members of your community (this includes neighbors)? (Circle 

all that apply)

1% 1 Daily SOC1

11% 2 Weekly SOC2

23% 3 Monthly SOC3

44% 4 Yearly SOC4

22% 5 Never SOC5

% reported is % circled

(n=326)

2. How often do you currently participate in community groups that make decisions 

about what happens in your community (e.g., home owner association, etc.)? (Circle all 

that apply)

<1% 1 Daily COM1

3% 2 Weekly COM2

17% 3 Monthly COM3

48% 4 Yearly COM4

29% 5 Never  Skip to Question 4 COM5

LEADSOC (n=216)

3. Do you currently have a leadership role in any social or community groups? (Circle 

one number)

72% 1 No

28% 2 Yes

SOCIAL4 (n=307)

4. Since you bought or rented your property, has your community had any wildfirerelated events or are there any organizations that address wildfire in your community 

(e.g., Firewise meeting, meetings with fire department about wildfire, community 

wildfire-awareness group or event)? (Circle one number)

31% 1 No

54% 2 Yes

15% 3 Not Sure

Section 6: Now, we want you to think beyond just your neighbors, to consider the people who live 

near you. We refer to this as your community in the following questions. This would be your 

immediate neighborhood, subdivision, or development. If you live in a more rural setting, think of 

the surrounding area that would best approximate a neighborhood, subdivision, or development.
24

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

16

SOCIAL5 (n=306)

5. Have you ever participated in any wildfire-related events or organizations (e.g.,

wildfire meeting, slash collection day) in your community? (Circle one number)

62% 1 No  Skip to Question 7

38% 2 Yes

SOCIAL6 (n=116)

6. Do you play a leadership role in any of the wildfire-related events or organizations 

mentioned in Questions 4 or 5 above? (Circle one number)

78% 1 No

22% 2 Yes

7. In your opinion, how much does each of the following contribute to the current 

wildfire danger in your community? (Circle one number for each)

Not at all Some A lot

Build up of vegetation on public land. 

DANGER1 (n=302) 8% 10% 38% 20% 24%

The number of houses being built in 

your community. DANGER2 (n=305) 25% 17% 34% 14% 10%

Timber cutting practices. DANGER3 

(n=299) 38% 17% 26% 10% 8%

Vandalism and/or arson. DANGER4 

(n=302) 34% 25% 23% 10% 8%

Recreational use on public lands.

DANGER5 (n=306) 18% 10% 32% 18% 22%

Natural processes (droughts, changes in 

vegetation over time, lightning, etc.). 

DANGER6 (n=307)

1% 2% 21% 31% 45%

Larger environmental changes such as 

global warming. DANGER7 (n=301) 18% 15% 29% 21% 18%

Diseases and pests (bark beetle, dwarf 

mistletoe) DANGER8 (n=304) 8% 9% 25% 27% 31%

Other (please specify): 

DANGER9 (n=32) 6% 0% 22% 13% 59%
25

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

17

AGE (n=296)

1. What is your age? (Fill in the blank)

mean=57 Years old

GENDER (n=304)

2. Are you? (Circle one number)

55% 1 Male

45% 2 Female

3. What is your racial or ethnic group? (Circle all that apply)

1=circled; 0=not circled; % reported is % circled

(n=302)

97% 1 White RACE1

1% 2 Black or African American RACE2

3% 3 Hispanic RACE3

9% 4 American Indian or Alaskan Native RACE4

6% 5 Asian RACE5

1% 6 Other RACE6

MARRY (n=298)

4. What best describes your current marital status? (Circle one number)

79% 1 Now Married

5% 2 Widowed

11% 3 Divorced

5% 4 Never Married

EDUC (n=301)

5. What is the highest grade or year of school you completed? (Circle one number)

0% 1 Eighth grade or less

1% 2 Some high school

5% 3 High school graduate

20% 4 Some college or technical school

5% 5 Technical or trade school

28% 6 College graduate

12% 7 Some graduate work

30% 8 Advanced Degree (M.D., M.A., M.S., Ph.D., etc.)

In this section, we ask about personal and household characteristics. As with all questions in this 

survey, your responses are completely confidential. 
26

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

18

EMPLOY (n=300)

6. Which of the following best describes your current employment situation? (Circle 

one number)

36% 1 Employed full time

5% 2 Employed part time

3% 3 Unemployed

17% 4 Self-employed

39% 5 Retired

INCOME (n=275)

7. Which of the following categories describes your household income? (Circle one 

number)

6% 1 Less than $25,000

10% 2 $25,000 - $34,999

12% 3 $35,000 – $49,999

24% 4 $50,000 - $74,999

17% 5 $75,000 - $99,999

14% 6 $100,000 - $124,999

12% 7 $125,000 - $200,000

6% 8 More than $200,000
27

Research Note RMRS-RN-48WWW. 2011

19

Thank you for your help. Use the space below to write any comments. 

Please return the survey in the enclosed envelope or if you lost the envelope, please 

return to: 

Professor Nicholas Flores

Institute of Behavioral Science 

University of Colorado at Boulder 

483 UCB 

Boulder CO 80309 
You may order additional copies of this publication by sending your 

mailing information in label form through one of the following media. 

Please specify the publication title and series number.

Publishing Services

Telephone (970) 498-1392

FAX (970) 498-1122

E-mail rschneider@fs.fed.us

Web site http://www.fs.fed.us/rm/publications

Mailing address Publications Distribution

Rocky Mountain Research Station

240 West Prospect Road

Fort Collins, CO 80526
Federal Recycling Program Printed on Recycled Paper

The Rocky Mountain Research Station develops scientific information 

and technology to improve management, protection, and use of the 

forests and rangelands. Research is designed to meet the needs of 

the National Forest managers, Federal and State agencies, public and 

private organizations, academic institutions, industry, and individuals. 

Studies accelerate solutions to problems involving ecosystems, range, 

forests, water, recreation, fire, resource inventory, land reclamation, 

community sustainability, forest engineering technology, multiple use 

economics, wildlife and fish habitat, and forest insects and diseases. 

Studies are conducted cooperatively, and applications may be found 

worldwide.

Station Headquarters

Rocky Mountain Research Station

240 W Prospect Road

Fort Collins, CO 80526

(970) 498-1100

Research Locations

Reno, Nevada

Albuquerque, New Mexico

Rapid City, South Dakota

Logan, Utah

Ogden, Utah

Provo, Utah

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all of its 

programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, disability, 

and where applicable, sex (including gender identity and expression), marital 

status, familial status, parental status, religion, sexual orientation, political 

beliefs, genetic information, reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s 

income is derived from any public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases 

apply to all programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means 

for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) 

should contact USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write to: USDA, Assistant Secretary for Civil 

Rights, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil Rights, 1400 Independence 

Avenue, S.W., Stop 9410, Washington, DC 20250-9410. Or call toll-free at 

(866) 632-9992 (English) or (800) 877-8339 (TDD) or (866) 377-8642 (English 

Federal-relay) or (800) 845-6136 (Spanish Federal-relay). USDA is an equal 

opportunity provider and employer.

www.fs.fed.us/rmrs

Flagstaff, Arizona

Fort Collins, Colorado

Boise, Idaho

Moscow, Idaho

Bozeman, Montana

Missoula, Montana