FAQs: Moorland Wildfire Response Costs - Managed vs. Unmanaged Landscapes
- Rob Beeson
- Jul 31
- 6 min read
The sources used to compile these FAQs highlight how unmanaged moorlands, characterized by heavy fuel loads and difficult access, lead to more severe, prolonged, and costly firefighting operations, often requiring extensive personnel, specialized equipment, and aerial support.
What is the primary difference in wildfire dynamics between unmanaged and managed moorland landscapes in the UK?
Unmanaged moorland landscapes are characterized by a significant accumulation of "fuel load," which includes continuous expanses of heather, purple moor grass, or dense conifers. This high fuel load facilitates the unimpeded spread of fire, leading to larger, more intense, and sustained wildfires with flame lengths potentially reaching over 50 feet.
These conditions can render fires uncontrollable by Fire and Rescue Services (FRS), sometimes forcing them to withdraw. In contrast, managed moorlands utilize practices like controlled burning (muirburn), grazing, and rewetting to reduce fuel loads and create a mosaic of vegetation, which limits fire intensity and spread. This makes wildfires in managed areas less severe, more manageable, and quicker to suppress.
How do unmanaged moorlands impact the resources and operational response of Fire and Rescue Services (FRS)?
Unmanaged moorlands significantly escalate the demands on FRS resources. The high fuel loads and challenging terrain often require the deployment of numerous fire crews from multiple counties, specialized vehicles like Unimogs and Argocats, and costly aerial support (helicopters).
These fires can burn for days or weeks, particularly if they penetrate deep into dry peat soils, requiring prolonged firefighter shifts and continuous monitoring. The inaccessibility of these areas also slows response times and complicates logistics, leading to higher operational costs and diverting essential FRS personnel and equipment from other emergencies.
What specific land management practices are employed in managed moorlands to mitigate wildfire risk, and how do they work?
Managed moorlands employ several key practices to mitigate wildfire risk:
Controlled Burning (Cool Burning/Muirburn): This involves intentionally igniting small, low-intensity fires during suitable winter months to remove the top layer of combustible vegetation. This creates a patchwork of heather of different ages, suppresses scrub, and establishes effective firebreaks, reducing the overall fuel load.
Grazing Herbivores: Animals like cattle, sheep and horses consume vegetation, preventing fuel accumulation and promoting habitat diversity. Their movement also helps bury leaf litter, further reducing combustible material.
Rewetting: Restoring native habitats and re-establishing wetlands by filling ditches or allowing peatbogs to recover significantly dampens fire intensity. Sphagnum moss, common in peatlands, absorbs large amounts of water, making these areas less flammable and acting as natural firebreaks.
These practices collectively reduce the volume of combustible material, limit fire intensity, and slow the rate of spread.
Can you provide examples of the direct firefighting costs associated with unmanaged moorland wildfires in the UK?
Major unmanaged moorland wildfires in the UK have incurred substantial direct firefighting costs:
Saddleworth Moor (2018): This fire burned approximately 971 hectares for over three weeks, costing around £1.2 million for FRS operations, or about £1,236 per hectare. Including immediate damages, some estimates place the cost at around £9,000 per hectare.
Winter Hill (2018): Contained to 800 hectares, this blaze lasted 41 days and cost the county £1.2 million, or approximately £1,500 per hectare for firefighting.
Marsden Moor (2019): Burning 700 hectares over four days, the immediate cost for firefighting and habitat damage was estimated at £500,000, or roughly £700 per hectare. Repeated fires on Marsden Moor cost over £700,000 in combined response and damage in two years.
Bleaklow Moor (2003): A 740-hectare fire that lasted five days, with suppression costs estimated at £550,000, or about £743 per hectare.
These figures often represent only the direct operational costs and do not include broader economic, social, or environmental impacts.
How do the financial burdens of wildfires on unmanaged moorlands compare to those on managed moorlands?
The financial burden of wildfires is significantly higher on unmanaged moorlands. While the average annual wildfire response cost across the UK is about £55 million, a single "megafire" on an unmanaged moor can cost £1 million or more in firefighting alone.
Unmanaged, fuel-rich moorlands often see firefighting costs ranging from £5,000 to £10,000 per hectare for serious incidents, potentially skyrocketing to over £20,000 per hectare for extreme deep peat fires or those encroaching on communities.
In contrast, fires in managed moorlands, due to reduced fuel loads and quicker containment, often fall into the lower range of £500–£1,000 per hectare, leading to significantly lower total incident costs. Proactive land management, though it has upfront costs, is considered economically justified given the exceedingly high per-hectare costs of uncontrolled wildfires.
What is the "firefighting trap," and how does proactive land management help avoid it?
The "firefighting trap" describes a phenomenon where escalating fire suppression costs consume budgets that would otherwise be allocated to prevention efforts. This creates a cycle where insufficient investment in prevention leads to more frequent and severe fires, which in turn demand more resources for suppression, perpetuating the cycle.
Proactive land management, such as controlled burning, grazing, and rewetting, helps break this trap by significantly reducing fuel loads and fire severity. This diminishes the likelihood of catastrophic fires, thereby reducing the need for massive, expensive suppression efforts.
Investing in these preventative measures, despite their initial costs, is an economic necessity that leads to long-term savings in direct firefighting expenditures and ensures FRS resources are not perpetually overwhelmed.
What is the role of inter-agency collaboration and non-FRS personnel in wildfire response in moorland environments?
Inter-agency collaboration and the involvement of non-FRS personnel are crucial for effective wildfire response in moorlands. Gamekeepers and moorland managers often act as initial responders, utilizing their local expertise and specialized equipment (e.g., fire-fogging units, ATVs) that can access remote areas.
Collaborative frameworks, such as the Fire Operations Group (FOG) in the Peak District, bring together FRS officers, gamekeepers, National Park Rangers, and other personnel to coordinate resources and share local knowledge.
The early intervention of trained land managers is vital for containing fires at an initial, less costly stage, significantly reducing the eventual personnel and time burden on formal FRS and leading to more efficient resource deployment.
What are the key policy recommendations for improving wildfire response and prevention in UK moorlands?
To enhance wildfire response and prevention, several policy adjustments are recommended:
Investment in FRS Specialist Training and Equipment: Provide FRS with appropriate vehicles (e.g., Unimogs, Land Rovers) and tailored training for effective moorland wildfire operations.
Support for Traditional and Nature-Based Land Management: Re-evaluate approaches to devastating wildfires by supporting practices like cool burning, vegetation cutting, sheep grazing, and rewilding initiatives to reduce fuel loads.
Improved Inter-Agency Collaboration and Fire Planning: Develop collaborative fire plans that include landowner contacts, access points, water sources, and equipment details, building on successful models like the Peak District Fire Operations Group.
Public Awareness Campaigns: Implement robust campaigns to reduce human-caused ignitions, emphasizing outdoor fire safety and discouraging practices like using disposable barbecues on moorlands.
These recommendations aim for a holistic, integrated approach to landscape governance, aligning land management policies with FRS preparedness to cultivate fire-resilient landscapes and alleviate financial burdens.
Key References
📧 Keep updated on this and all moorland issues - sign up for our FREE weekly newsletter.
