Cited by 69Fire effects on ecosystemsForest Management and PolicyDisaster Management and Resilience

Evidence for the effect of homes on wildfire suppression costs

Gude, Patricia H., Jones, Kingsford, Rasker, Ray, Greenwood, Mark C.·2013·International Journal of Wildland Fire

Abstract

This paper uses wildfires in the Sierra Nevada area of California to estimate the relationship between housing and fire suppression costs. We investigated whether the presence of homes was associated with increased costs of firefighting after controlling for the effects of potential confounding variables including fire size, weather, terrain and human factors such as road access. This paper investigates wildfires in a way that other published studies have not; we analysed costs at the daily level, retaining information that would have been lost had we aggregated the data. We used linear mixed models to estimate the effects of homes on daily costs while incorporating within-fire variation. We conclude that the expected increase in the log daily cost with each unit increase in the log count of homes within 6 miles (~9.7 km) of an active fire is 0.07 (P = 0.005). The findings of this study are in agreement with most other previous empirical studies that have investigated the relationship between fire suppression costs and housing using cumulative fire costs and more generalised data on home locations. The study adds to mounting evidence that increases in housing lead to increases in fire suppression costs.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1071/wf11095

Cites

3 of 3 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Despite vigorous fire suppression near human communities, the number of homes destroyed by wildfire continues on an upward trend.

    “Despite the vigorous fire suppression near human communities (Gebert et al. 2007;Liang et al. 2008;Gude et al. 2013) the number of homes destroyed by wildfire continues on an upward trend.”

    From Negative consequences of positive feedbacks in US wildfire management (2015) · cites this paper as Gude et al. 2013

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gude, P. H., Jones, K., Rasker, R., & Greenwood, M. C.
Affiliations
  • AHeadwaters Economics, PO Box 7059, Bozeman MT 59771, USA.
  • BObjectiveStat Consulting, PO Box 501, Manhattan, MT 59741, USA.
  • Montana State University (US)
Corresponding author
Gude, Patricia H.
Venue
International Journal of Wildland Fire
Published
2013-01-03
Volume
22
Issue
4
Pages
537-548
ISSN
  • 1049-8001 (ISSN-L)
  • 1448-5516
OpenAlex
W1981613453
Cited by
69
References
3
Citations by year
2026: 4 · 2025: 5 · 2024: 4 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 6 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 10 · 2018: 5 · 2017: 3 · 2016: 6 · 2015: 3 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 4
FWCI
4.82
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
International Journal of Wildland Fire (publishedVersion)
Funders
U.S. Department of Agriculture
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Fire effects on ecosystems
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Global and Planetary Change › Forest Management and Policy
  • Social Sciences › Sociology and Political Science › Disaster Management and Resilience
Keywords
wildfire suppression costs, housing, fire costs, Sierra Nevada, firefighting, housing development, fire management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review