Resident understandings of a county-level evacuation warning system for wildfire in central Idaho

Implementing evacuation warnings during wildfire events is a challenging task due to the variety of social contexts and ecological conditions that are present across fire-prone landscapes in the rural West. One common... [ view full abstract ]

Implementing evacuation warnings during wildfire events is a challenging task due to the variety of social contexts and ecological conditions that are present across fire-prone landscapes in the rural West. One common approach to inform residents about wildfire threats and evacuation processes in rural areas is a three-level evacuation warning system. This system is typically adopted at the county level and disseminated by local officials or media surrounding fire events. Households placed under level one evacuation should be aware of the oncoming risk but are not required to leave, while level two encourages residents to be prepared to leave at any time. Households placed under level three are advised to evacuate immediately. The implementation of the three-level evacuation system is complex, particularly during wildfire where conditions and threat level can change rapidly. Additionally, evacuation may not be a priority for some rural residents who plan for alternatives to evacuation where they stay and defend their property or shelter in place during a wildfire event. Exploring residents’ understandings of the three-level warning system provides an opportunity to improve resident safety and tailor emergency notifications or risk communication to better suit the needs of rural residents.

This study presents findings from a mixed-mode survey of 2,767 households in Valley and Adams Counties, Idaho. The survey asked residents a series of questions about the extent to which they understood and supported the three-level evacuation system for wildfire in their area. Additional questions asked about each household’s level of planning for wildfire emergencies, travel plans during an evacuation, perceptions of wildfire risk, and basic demographic information. We received 1,349 completed questionnaires, each of which was linked to property-level GIS data. We present initial findings from our analysis of these responses, including the factors that help understand varying degrees of support for the three-level warning system. We also identify the factors that may influence variable understandings of the warning system, and what that might mean for evacuation dynamics. We close by discussing the relevance of our findings for wildfire management and risk communication, including recommendations about utilization of three-level evacuation systems among rural populations.