Abstract
Fire related distaster have taken the spotlight in recent years due to increased awareness through traditional news and social media resulting from evolving climate factors such as increasing periods of drought and warmer temperatures. This leads to fuel sources that can quickly ignite and spread causing damage to homes and business as well as leading to loss of life. Efforts to predict fire related risk exist around the globe. Several agencies in the United States alone currenly preduct and advise on when and where fire risk is heightened. Each organization has their own method for quantifying fire risk for an area. While some depend on meterological prediction models, others consider the strain on the country's wildfire mitigation resources when coming up with their scale for fire risk.
This study sought to compare the differences between how these organizations quantify preditions of fire risk. In doing so, it aimed to uncover weaknesses between methods, By learning from the range of models, discussion can then be built on possible plans for improvement. With climate prediction models changing to try and and keep up with Earth's dynamic climate, fire risk predictions will be in flux as a result. In the future, these models should provide more up-to-date information when it is needed most. A more accurate assessment of fire risk can better prepare communities and individuals just as any for any other natural disaster.