A plume of smoke from the Remington Fire in southern Montana during sunset on Aug. 25 (Photo from the House Draw Fire Command via Inciweb).
In a recent study of properties at risk for wildfire , Montana has the second highest percentage of at-risk properties with more than half of the structures in the state possibly vulnerable to wildfire.
The study was published by researchers at LendingTree, a national company that specializes in home mortgages and also studies issues related to housing. In the report, it shows that as the climate gets hotter and states like Montana become more populated, more properties are at risk. That additional risk is driving up the cost of homeowners insurance for many residents, even those whose property isn’t normally thought of as at-risk.
According to the study, wildfires nationally have increased by 17% year over year. Furthermore, Montana is one of the western states that hasn’t adopted a collection of building codes for areas where housing touches wilderness. The area is often referred to as the “wildland-urban interface” — and Montana has a lot of both wildland and properties that touch those areas.
Only Wyoming has more buildings at risk of wildfire with 54% compared to Montana at 51% . Study authors collected national data from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and the National Risk Index of wildfire danger.
In terms of sheer property value, California is at risk for nearly $1.4 billion in losses it estimates, while Florida comes in a distant second at No. 2, with $269.3 million, followed by Texas at $240.3 million.
In a previously reported story , Headwaters Economics pointed out that the number of homes in moderate and high wildfire risks areas nearly doubled between 1990 and 2018.
In 2022, the most recent available data for the LendingTree report, 51% of all homes were in areas prone to wildfire.
The wildfire risk has meant two things for Montana residents: It likely means homeowners insurance is rising quickly in some areas. However, it also means that overall insurance rates for all groups will rise as insurance carriers spread the risk to different pools.
In some states, insurance companies have either quit offering coverage in wildfire-prone areas or made it prohibitively expensive with less coverage. In some states where natural disasters due to climate are more common, like Florida, the state has had to create a state insurance pool of “last resort” that offers property owners some coverage because of insurance companies’ unwillingness to take the risk in certain areas.
Montana does not have such a program, and officials with the state said that one has not been needed because of commercially available insurance.
Montana’s rise in the number of properties at risk of a wildfire has shot up, largely because of the after effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, says one of the lead LendingTree insurance experts, Rob Bhatt. At the time, Montana’s lower housing costs, coupled with residents fleeing from larger, urban areas to more remote locations made Montana’s homebuilding boom.
“A lot of Montanans can do things before a fire starts,” said Kelly Pohl, an the associate director of Headwaters Economics. “We have to realize that wildfire is part of our landscape, so we have to take actions to reduce the likelihood that it will destroy property.”
The challenge, Bhatt said, is that as the climate changes, fires grow in their intensity and duration, making it a more risky proposition to fight them. That also means that they become larger and larger.
“It really has to be up to local government to minimize the risk,” Bhatt said.
But that brings a new, different challenge, said Pohl, who has studied the problem extensively. The Montana Legislature has adopted laws that prohibit local governments from making zoning or ordinances more restrictive than the state.
She said that part of that resistance to adopting more comprehensive wildfire-property rules comes from an historic “Western attitude” tied to individual property rights.
“Unfortunately that ties the hands of local leaders who might want to think about it,” Pohl said. “We all hear about the burden of these costly disasters, but the most cost effective way to deal with it is to avoid them.”
Even though California has the most property, by value, at risk, the Golden State has more than 30 times the number of people, and Bhatt explained, that the number of properties at risk in Montana, as a percentage, is much, much larger than even California.
“A majority of homes in most California communities are urban, not sprawling and out in the woods,” Bhatt said.
Preparing for fires, though, isn’t just a matter of better zoning or different materials, although everyone the Daily Montanan spoke with for this article agreed those would help. They also said that fighting fires and protecting properties have other needs, such as more firefighting equipment and better roads and water systems — all costly in a large, spread-out state like Montana.
“No one likes the guy who comes and tells people what to do, but uniform rules and codes can protect the properties,” Bhatt said. “And those places where there is greatest risk will pay the most. Sometimes, insurance companies may not even cover them.”
OK, now what?
Bhatt and others admit that the solution to the problem isn’t simply forcing people off properties. He said there are plenty of things that homeowners and local leaders can do to mitigate the risk.
“You want to be aware of the risk,” Bhatt said. “You’re not going to tear down something and move it elsewhere.”
Instead, newer construction materials are more fire resistant, and Pohl said a cost analysis shows that many of the newer products do not significantly —if at all — increase the building costs.
“It’s not like you have to build homes out of concrete bricks. There are wonderful materials,” she said. “It doesn’t necessarily cost more, either.”
But Pohl said cost is usually the first objection a person may raise to building a dream home in the woods without more protection.
“Awareness is part of it as well — cost is a common misperception,” Pohl said. “The data says it doesn’t cost more. It costs the most to retrofit something. Folks just assume that they’re doing everything they can for durability and longevity.”
She said that states, including Montana, have adopted codes for other disasters like earthquakes and flood zones, so it makes sense to prepare for wildfires.
Bhatt said landscaping and property maintenance can help by trimming any fuels — brush, small trees — that are near buildings, essentially robbing any future fires of potential fuels.
“What we want to do is make homes as fire resistant as possible,” Bhatt said. “You need to look at the demands and the capacity of firefighting resources and water.”
Other strategies include prohibiting vehicles or cars from going off road near dry fuels because many fires are started by hot mufflers or other vehicle parts. Another key strategy is making sure roads are either paved or wider for emergency vehicles like firefighting trucks to access the more remote properties in order to extinguish the blazes quickly.
Pohl said that some communities are beginning to wrestle with the problem, trying to figure out how to balance the state’s permissive laws with protecting the community.
She said Missoula, Gallatin and Park counties have been looking for ways to make their new developments more “wildfire resilient.”
“It will take leadership at the state level to allow others to keep people safe,” Pohl said.
Local News
