Photo: P199 · Public domainHazard risk in Gracefield is higher than in 85% of Canadian towns
Fire seldom reaches Gracefield: since 1986, 0% of the land within 25 km has burned (0.001% a year). Earthquakes add more: NRCan’s model puts building losses at $0.099 a year per $1,000 of value, against $0.030 for the typical town. In Health Canada’s survey, 13% of homes tested in the area exceeded 200 Bq/m³ (6.6% typical). Gracefield grades D for hazard risk; wildfire is low here, so it earns no credit.
What stands out about Gracefield’s hazards
For Gracefield, from NRCan’s seismic model, Health Canada’s radon survey, the national burned-area record and the flood map inventory.
What Gracefield faces
Each hazard against its own yardstick; meters run from low to high on that yardstick.
Wildfire
Earthquakes
Radon
Flood study
Gracefield grades D for hazard risk
Earthquake risk and radon make Gracefield’s grade; wildfire can only lower it, never raise it, and flood studies are listed but not scored.
Its place: #426 of 507 in Quebec and #2,418 of 2,589 Canadian towns.
How sure: Earthquake losses are a model’s expectation over many years, not a forecast for any one. Only 63 homes were tested in the survey area, so the radon share is rough. The burned-area record misses fires under about 10 ha and most grass and farm fires.
Little of the land around Gracefield has burned: 0.1% within 5 km, 0% within 25 km since 1986
Fires mapped since 1986 around where Gracefield’s residents live, and the fuel next to their homes.
Low: the land around Gracefield burns at 0.001% a year, where the typical Canadian town sees 0.000%.
About as much forest grows next to Gracefield’s homes (32% within 5 km) as across 25 km (33%).
Shares of land within 5 and 25 km of populated blocks: burned at least once in 1986–2025 (CWFIS burned-area composite), forest fuel and grass (fire behaviour fuel types, 2026, 250 m grid).
Burn rate a year, towns in Quebec · highest of 513
Gracefield burns at 0.001% a year, 136th of 513 towns in Quebec; the leader, Mistissini, reaches 0.31%.
Each bar: the yearly average share of land within 25 km of a town’s homes that burned, 1986–2025 (CWFIS); the seven highest towns of 2,500 people or more.
Some fire is mapped around Gracefield, but not enough to leave the low band, where 92% of Canada’s 2,610 towns are; 7.5% rank higher.
Bands of the yearly burn rate: low under 0.05%, moderate under 0.25%, high under 1%, very high 1% or more; towns of 2,500 people or more.
Fire danger and active fires (CWFIS)
Canadian Wildland Fire Information System: National Burned Area Composite 1986–2025 and fire behaviour fuel types (2026), Natural Resources Canada. Measured within 25 km and 5 km of each populated dissemination area; past fire, not a forecast.
Gracefield is on the flood map inventory: 1 study, by Gouvernement du Québec
Flood studies whose area touches Gracefield, from NRCan’s inventory, each linked to its owner.
A 1978 study by Gouvernement du Québec covers Gracefield, and its map, not the inventory, shows the zones.
| Study | By | Year | Status |
|---|---|---|---|
| Farmers-Hull | Gouvernement du Québec | 1978 | final |
Towns with a flood study on file
Flood maps are thinner in Quebec, 45% of towns against 58% nationally, but Gracefield has one.
NRCan Canada Flood Map Inventory: a study footprint touching the town’s boundary; towns of 2,500 people or more.
The grade leaves flood out, since a study area says nothing about how many of Gracefield’s homes are at risk.
The inventory’s own caution (NRCan): “The Canada Flood Map (CFM) does not include every flood hazard map in Canada and may be incomplete or contain inaccuracies. It should not be relied upon as the official source of flood mapping information. Furthermore, if a map appears to be missing, this does not necessarily mean that the area has never been mapped. For the official version of a map, updated information, or confirmation of applicable regulations, please contact the local authority responsible for flood mapping.”
Natural Resources Canada, Canada Flood Map Inventory; links go to each study’s owner.
Shaking is Gracefield’s costliest hazard: $0.099 a year per $1,000
NRCan’s seismic risk model: the damage shaking is expected to do to buildings each year, on average over many years.
Gracefield’s $0.099 is about 3.3 times the typical town’s $0.030: it sits in one of Canada’s more active seismic zones.
Shaking damage a year per $1,000 of building value
At $0.099, Gracefield is below the typical town in Quebec ($0.14); La Pocatière is highest at $0.48.
NRCan seismic risk model (2022): mean yearly building loss per $1,000 of value; medians of towns of 2,500 people or more.
26% of Canada’s 2,611 towns expect more shaking damage than Gracefield, which places it in the upper third.
Each column: the share of Canada’s towns of 2,500 people or more in that range of yearly loss per $1,000 (NRCan, 2022).
Only shaking damage to buildings in Gracefield is counted; landslides, liquefaction, tsunami and fire after a quake aren’t.
Natural Resources Canada, Canada’s Seismic Risk Model (2022), by census subdivision (2016 boundaries; a few 2021 subdivisions take their residents’ mean).
13% of homes tested around Gracefield are over the radon guideline
Health Canada’s survey of long-term home tests: the share above the 200 Bq/m³ guideline.
Gracefield’s area, at 13%, is above the 6.6% of the typical Canadian town, so testing is worth more here than most places. Nobody publishes radon tests for Gracefield alone, so this card uses the figure for the Outaouais health region.
Tested homes over 200 Bq/m³
Over 600 Bq/m³
Gracefield’s area, at 13%, is above the median in Quebec (8.2%), and 4.8% of its tests passed 600 Bq/m³.
Health Canada radon survey (2009–2011), by 2007 health region; medians of towns of 2,500 people or more.
The 10–20% band holds 22% of Canada’s 2,611 towns, Gracefield among them; 4.6% rank above.
Each bar: the share of Canada’s towns of 2,500 people or more whose survey area had that share of tests over 200 Bq/m³.
Radon varies from house to house in Gracefield, so the survey is a reason to test, not a result for yours.
Health Canada, Cross-Canada Survey of Radon Concentrations in Homes (2009–2011).
Where to get warnings in Gracefield
Environment and Climate Change Canada issues the weather alerts for Gracefield; Alert Ready carries the urgent ones to phones, radio and TV.
| Alert | What it means |
|---|---|
| Warning | Severe weather is happening or about to: act now. |
| Watch | Conditions favour severe weather: be ready. |
| Advisory | Weather that is less severe but could disrupt the day. |
| Special weather statement | Unusual weather worth knowing about. |
| Special air quality statement | Poor air, often wildfire smoke. |
In fire season, check CWFIS for danger and active fires around Gracefield, and listen to local authorities for orders.
Weather alerts (ECCC) · Alert Ready · Fire danger and active fires (CWFIS)
Hazards in the places around Gracefield
The same four hazards for the places next door.
None of the places around has more fire nearby than Gracefield (low); Kazabazua comes closest (low).
Radon is the survey area’s figure, so neighbours in one area share it.
Get ready for what Gracefield faces
Practical steps for Gracefield’s hazards, most pressing first.
- Test for three months in winter.
- Over 200 Bq/m³: fix it.
- Kits are cheap; pros test too.
- Never drive through floodwater.
- Move papers and medicines upstairs.
- Ask whether your street is mapped.
- Clear needles and wood nearby.
- Keep a grab-and-go bag ready.
- In smoke, stay in; filter air.
- Has it had a radon test?
- Check the address on the flood map.
- Are flood and wildfire insured?
What this data can and can’t tell you
- Radon is a survey. Health Canada’s survey tested some 14,000 homes over three months; until postal-area boundaries are loaded, Gracefield takes its 2007 health region’s share.
- Earthquakes are modelled. Seismic risk is NRCan’s model of yearly building losses from shaking, averaged over many years and given for Gracefield’s census subdivision (a neighbourhood shows its city’s).
- Flood studies aren’t flood zones. The flood inventory points to maps; it is incomplete and not the official source, so ask the municipality about any street in Gracefield.
- Wildfire counts one way. For Gracefield, wildfire means how much nearby land burned in the past forty years, a one-way input that can pull Risk down and nothing more.
Questions about flooding and hazards in Gracefield
How big is the earthquake risk in Gracefield?
About $0.099 a year per $1,000 of building value, NRCan’s long-run expectation for Gracefield.
Does Gracefield flood?
The inventory lists a study touching Gracefield; whether a given street floods is on that map, not in the grade.
Is Gracefield at risk of wildfire?
Not much by Canadian standards: Gracefield’s band is low, with 0% of the land within 25 km burned since 1986 (last in 2025), so wildfire doesn’t change its grade.
How is Gracefield’s Hazard risk Grade worked out?
Gracefield’s Hazard risk grade is D, built on earthquakes and radon with a one-sided wildfire input.
Is radon a problem in Gracefield?
13% of the 63 homes Health Canada tested around Gracefield topped the guideline; your own house needs its own test.
Seismic risk: Natural Resources Canada. Radon: Health Canada. Wildfire: Canadian Wildland Fire Information System. Flood studies: Natural Resources Canada, Canada Flood Map Inventory. Contains information licensed under the Open Government Licence – Canada.
Sources: NRCan, Canada’s Seismic Risk Model 2022 · Health Canada, Cross-Canada Survey of Radon Concentrations in Homes · CWFIS, National Burned Area Composite and FBP fuel types · NRCan, Canada Flood Map Inventory. Under the Statistics Canada Open Licence.
Adapted from Statistics Canada (Census of Population 2021, population estimates 2025, 2021 census boundaries) under the Statistics Canada Open Licence; this does not constitute an endorsement by Statistics Canada. Neighbourhood names in some cities © OpenStreetMap contributors (ODbL).