In a state where wildfires have become an increasing concern, a government-mandated wildfire hazard classification system was supposed to help protect Oregonians by identifying high-risk areas and ensuring proper mitigation measures were in place. Instead, the system is putting rural landowners at risk—financially, if not physically.
Kristine Miller, co-owner of Applegate River Ranch Estates LLC, is one such landowner caught in the crosshairs of this flawed system. Her 131-acre property, located along Helms Road in Grants Pass, has been newly designated as “High Wildfire Hazard” and placed within the state’s Wildland-Urban Interface (WUI). The classification, however, does not reflect the actual conditions on her land. It is a mislabeling that could have significant financial consequences, not only for her but for thousands of other rural property owners in Oregon.
For Miller and her business partner Don Wilson, the implications of this designation go far beyond mere labeling. The classification could drastically impact their ability to obtain or maintain homeowners’ insurance—something that, for many, is a non-negotiable requirement of their mortgage lenders. The trend is already evident across the state, where insurers are either denying coverage or raising premiums to unsustainable levels for properties deemed high-risk.
“This classification is deeply flawed and does not reflect the actual fire risk on my property,” Miller says. “The map fails to consider the fire-resistant nature of our land, and now, we could face significant financial losses.”
She isn’t alone in her frustration. Many property owners across Josephine County and the broader rural regions of Oregon have found themselves unfairly placed in high-risk categories despite having fire mitigation measures in place. The system, which was meant to guide responsible wildfire prevention, appears to be doing more harm than good by imposing severe financial burdens on property owners who have already taken significant steps to protect their land.
Miller’s property is uniquely equipped to withstand wildfires, but the assessment process failed to take these critical factors into account. Unlike forested areas with dense fuel loads, her land features extensive irrigation systems and natural firebreaks that dramatically lower the risk of a wildfire spreading.
The Applegate River, which runs through her property, provides a vital water source that keeps large portions of the land green and resistant to fire throughout the year. With 50 acres of primary water rights and an additional 30 acres of supplemental water rights, the property is far from the dry, overgrown landscapes that pose real wildfire threats.
Beyond water resources, the land itself is carefully maintained to minimize fire risk. The property has irrigated pastures and defensible spaces that serve as built-in firebreaks, features that should have been accounted for in the assessment but were seemingly ignored. Meanwhile, some truly high-risk areas—densely forested communities that have a history of wildfire evacuations—were given only a “Moderate Risk” classification, raising further questions about the map’s accuracy and fairness.
“The mapping process is inconsistent and arbitrary,” Miller says. “It makes no sense that properties with actual fire hazards are rated lower than ours. It’s putting people like us in an impossible position.”
The consequences of these designations are already being felt by rural landowners. Many are receiving notices from insurance companies that their policies will not be renewed due to their new classification. Those who can still obtain coverage are seeing their premiums skyrocket to levels they simply cannot afford.
“If we can’t get affordable insurance, we could lose our homes,” Miller warns. “This is not just about one property. It’s about the people in our community who can’t afford to fight back.”
For elderly homeowners on fixed incomes, low-income families, and small-scale farmers, the financial burden is devastating. Without the means to appeal the decision or challenge their classification, many face the grim reality of selling their properties—likely at a loss—or risking foreclosure. Others are being forced to spend thousands of dollars on additional mitigation measures in a desperate bid to appease insurance companies, even when those measures are redundant given their existing fire-resistant features.
“People are being forced into making impossible choices,” Miller says. “We’ve worked hard to make our land safe, but now we’re being penalized for something that isn’t even a real risk.”
Miller and other affected landowners are not taking this issue lightly. She is working to mobilize landowners across Josephine County and beyond to challenge what she describes as an unfair and scientifically flawed classification system.
As a first step, she has created a survey to collect data from property owners who have been impacted by the wildfire hazard map. The goal is to track how many have been misclassified, document insurance hikes and cancellations, and build a solid foundation for a legal challenge. The survey will also help identify those who have already filed appeals and provide insight into the broader financial repercussions of the system.
Landowners affected by the wildfire hazard map can submit their information here:
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLScvbdLIrr0VB6PDNjV3u7EzlGuReptoa3Fu5yVHbGowkAcXUw/viewform?usp=sharing
In addition to gathering data, Miller is actively seeking legal counsel to pursue action against the state’s wildfire mapping process. She is hoping to collaborate with attorneys and advocacy groups that have already begun challenging the map, believing that a united front will be the most effective way to demand changes.
As the wildfire hazard map continues to affect more landowners across Oregon, the urgency to address its flaws grows stronger. For many, this is not just an administrative issue—it is a matter of financial survival.
Miller is calling on fellow property owners, community leaders, and elected officials to take action before it is too late. The goal is not to dismantle the state’s wildfire risk assessment system entirely, but to ensure that it is based on accurate data, scientific analysis, and fair application.
“We need to act now,” she stresses. “If the state doesn’t fix this, many hardworking Oregonians will suffer. We need fair, science-based assessments before it’s too late.”
As more landowners share their experiences and join the movement, the push for fairness is gaining momentum. Whether through appeals, legal action, or community organizing, rural Oregonians are making it clear that they will not accept being misclassified and financially burdened by a flawed system.
For now, Miller remains determined to see this fight through to the end.
“This isn’t just about me,” she says. “This is about standing up for every rural Oregonian who is being unfairly targeted. If we don’t fight back, no one will.”
With growing support from affected landowners and increasing public awareness of the issue, the fight against Oregon’s wildfire hazard misclassification is far from over. But one thing is clear: rural communities are ready to demand justice, and they won’t back down.
