5 Things You Might Have Missed in MPs’ Wildfire Report

Quick summary

• Defra never delivered its promised 2023–27 wildfire risk programme, which MPs call a significant missed opportunity.

• MPs want wildfire prevention recognised as a public good and better supported by environmental land management funding.

• MPs want ministers to consider compulsory wildfire management plans for land managers in high-risk areas.

• Firefighting ponds could become easier to build, with permitted development rights extended, including within National Parks.

• MPs want Government funding for fire wardens to patrol high-risk landscapes during periods of elevated wildfire danger.

Beyond the headlines about controlled burning and peatland restoration, MPs’ latest wildfire report contains recommendations that could affect the day-to-day work of moorland managers.

These include possible new planning requirements, changes to environmental funding and simpler rules for building firefighting ponds. The report also identifies a Government wildfire programme that was promised but never delivered.

Below are five findings from the EFRA Committee’s report, A burning issue: managing wildfire risk, published on 21 October 2026, that deserve closer attention.

1. Defra never implemented its promised 2023–27 wildfire programme

In July 2023, the Government committed to a four-year wildfire risk programme intended to help land managers adapt to increasing fire danger.

It never happened.

The Committee described Defra’s failure to implement the programme as a “significant missed opportunity” to improve wildfire resilience.

MPs want ministers to explain why the programme was not delivered, what assessment they have made of the consequences and whether a replacement will be introduced.

They also want a timetable for future action.

For moorland managers, this raises questions about what support might have been available for adapting land management to wildfire risk, and what Defra now intends to provide.

Report paragraphs 98 and 103–104.

2. MPs want wildfire prevention recognised as an environmental public good

Land managers can already receive some funding for wildfire prevention through schemes such as Countryside Stewardship Higher Tier.

However, the Committee found that wildfire resilience is rarely a primary objective of agri-environment funding.

MPs argue that reducing wildfire risk should be recognised as a public good, just as improving flood resilience is.

They recommend reviewing Environmental Land Management schemes and other funding programmes to ensure they support practical prevention measures, rather than concentrating on assessments and plans.

Witnesses identified activities including controlled burning, cutting, grazing, scrub management, firebreaks and water storage.

The recommendation could strengthen the case for funding preventative work undertaken by moorland estates. It does not, however, create any new payment entitlement.

Report paragraphs 96–102.

3. MPs want compulsory wildfire management plans considered for high-risk land

Wildfire management plans are currently voluntary in most circumstances, although they are required for certain activities, including managed burning licences.

That could change.

The Committee wants the Government to assess whether land managers in high-risk areas should be required to prepare and maintain wildfire management plans.

Importantly, MPs have not recommended introducing a blanket requirement. They want ministers to examine the costs, benefits and practical implications before deciding whether additional obligations would be justified.

The report also recommends better mapping of wildfire risks across property boundaries, recognising that a fire starting on one estate can threaten neighbouring land.

For moorland managers, the proposals could mean closer cooperation with fire services and neighbouring estates, but potentially additional administrative responsibilities.

Report paragraphs 90–95.

4. Firefighting ponds could become easier to build, even in National Parks

Access to water can be a serious problem during moorland wildfires, particularly when prolonged dry weather places pressure on existing supplies.

The Committee heard evidence of firefighters struggling to obtain sufficient water. During the Stourbridge wildfire, reduced water pressure meant that refilling a water carrier took almost 40 minutes on one occasion.

MPs recommend removing obstacles to new wildfire suppression ponds and reservoirs.

Specifically, they want the Government to:

• Review planning and water-abstraction licensing requirements.

• Extend permitted development rights to wildfire suppression ponds.

• Ensure those rights also apply within National Parks.

For estates located far from mains water supplies, these changes could make it easier to establish dedicated firefighting water sources.

The recommendations have not changed existing planning or licensing rules.

Report paragraphs 50–57.

5. MPs want Government funding for fire wardens

Much of the work preventing wildfires currently falls to gamekeepers, landowners and other land managers who undertake voluntary fire patrols during dangerous weather.

The scale of this work can be considerable.

The National Gamekeepers’ Organisation told MPs that gamekeepers on one 6,000-acre Peak District estate had intervened in almost 1,000 incidents involving naked flames in a single year.

Witnesses also described the personal pressures of maintaining patrols, including abuse and threats when challenging visitors about dangerous behaviour.

The Committee wants Government funding for dedicated fire wardens or similar roles in high-risk landscapes during periods of elevated wildfire danger.

These wardens would help educate visitors, discourage dangerous activities and detect fires before they spread.

For moorland estates, such funding could reduce the burden of work currently undertaken voluntarily. No funding scheme has yet been established through this recommendation.

Report paragraphs 105–112 and 116–117.

What happens next?

These five findings show that the Committee’s recommendations extend well beyond controlled burning and peatland restoration.

They raise practical questions about who should pay for wildfire prevention, what support land managers should receive and whether additional responsibilities may be introduced.

All five remain parliamentary recommendations rather than Government policy.

You can read the full EFRA report, A burning issue: managing wildfire risk, alongside our earlier blog, MPs Back Moorland Managers and Demand Action on Wildfire Risk.

The Government is due to respond by 21 December 2026. That response should provide the first indication of which recommendations ministers intend to take forward, and when.