How Natural England's Policies Are Burning a Hole in Our Moors

Our moorlands are facing unprecedented challenges due to policies described as irrational, unproven, and expensive.

The Campaign for the Protection of Moorland Communities (C4PMC) highlights these issues in its "Burning Money" report, which contains criticism of Natural England’s policies for disregarding generations of local knowledge and risking the very landscapes it claims to protect.

The Looming Wildfire Catastrophe: A Failure of Fuel Load Management

The single biggest threat to life on Peak District moors is wildfire. Despite this, Natural England, alongside landowners like the National Trust and RSPB, is accused of not taking proper fuel load management seriously.

Historically, agencies like MAFF and English Nature actively encouraged controlled burning (muirburn) to restore heather and manage bracken. Geoff Eyre, known as the "heather doctor" for pioneering "cool burning," even received letters pushing him to burn more to combat heather loss.

However, Natural England has "suddenly changed tune," now advocating for "rewetting" and restricting or banning controlled burning. This shift leads to a "huge build-up of fuel," making wildfires more dangerous and damaging, even to subsurface peat.

Natural England's policies now restrict "most forms of practical fuel management," including burning and cutting, and land managers report difficulty obtaining effective cutting licenses.

Furthermore, NE is criticized for denying or delaying permission for crucial access roads onto moors, which would significantly aid firefighters. Paradoxically, intensive replanting and rewilding schemes often increase the fuel load, "refuelling fire prone areas". Major blazes like Saddleworth Moor and Winter Hill in 2018 occurred on landscapes "unmanaged in relation to the risk posed by wildfire".

Policies Rooted in "Questionable Research" and Misinformation

A significant concern is that Natural England's policies are often based on "widely-disputed yet frequently-repeated" claims and "questionable research," rather than practical understanding.

• The 2018 Ember report, which influenced policies reducing burning and sheep grazing, is described as "experimentally flawed" by ecologist Andreas Heinemeyer. Geoff Eyre noted that two "no-burn zones" in the Ember report actually burned out during the study.

• Claims that Sphagnum moss is essential for blanket bogs and that most peat bogs are "degraded" are challenged as "complete misinformation" and a "myth" by ecologists.

• Misinformation, often amplified by media based on "misleading press releases from nature groups," influences policy. For example, MP Olivia Blake's claims about wildfires being caused by controlled burning getting out of hand were based on a single source. Similarly, celebrity naturalists like Chris Packham make claims about the UK being "one of the most nature-depleted countries," overlooking extensive conservation work by land managers.

The "Rewetting" Fantasy and Costly Biodiversity Schemes

Natural England's shift towards "rewetting" moors is seen as a "fantasy" with "unintended consequences". Experts state there is "no generic evidence" that rewetting reduces wildfires, and Hatfield Moors suffered a catastrophic wildfire despite a high water table.

Geoff Eyre describes how rewetting initiatives, involving dams, have flooded gullies, killed vegetation, and then dried out to bare peat, failing to prevent flooding during Storm Babet and causing "hundreds of thousands of pounds of damage" downstream. Large-scale Sphagnum moss planting schemes are often described as "expensive failures" when planted on dry peat.

The Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) law, requiring developers to create "more nature," is criticized as a means for "local authorities and conservation charities" to "acquire land or funding schemes".

This system allows developers to "wash their hands of responsibility" by passing the task to farmers or wildlife groups. Concerns are raised about transparency and potential conflicts of interest, with some organizations charging Natural England significantly more for work than private individuals might.

The Devastating Impact on Farmers and Local Communities

Moorland communities feel their generations of knowledge and expertise are being ignored. Natural England's policies are seen as actively "pushing sheep off the moors," despite sheep being a "natural form of fuel load management," contributing to fuel build-up and loss of traditional skills.

The SSSI (Sites of Special Scientific Interest) designation is viewed as a "kiss of death" and a form of "backdoor nationalisation" for private landowners, with the definition of "favourable condition" constantly changing, making the designation "meaningless" and a target for land acquisition by NE.

Public money is being spent on schemes with "no long-term effects or recognisable benefits". Examples include the £3 million Haweswater tree-planting scheme, which failed and left tens of thousands of plastic and metal tree guards littering the landscape, and the £5 million "Life in the Ravines" project, accused of felling ash trees only to replant non-native species and leaving felled trees to rot, potentially causing flooding.

Moors for the Future (MFF), a quango consulted by NE for restoration costs, is accused of "writing their own cheques," charging vastly more than private individuals for similar work.

The push for these new policies is leading to a "brain drain" of vital local skills - farming, dry stone walling, gamekeeping, and safe burning techniques are "going fast," threatening the fabric of rural communities.

Moving Forward: A Call for Common Sense

The moorland communities are calling for a return to common sense in moorland management. This includes:

• Prioritizing Wildfire Prevention: Implementing proven fuel load management techniques like controlled burning, which benefits local wildlife and reduces wildfire risk.

• Valuing Local Expertise: Listening to and collaborating with farmers, gamekeepers, and land managers who possess invaluable, generations-old knowledge of the uplands.

• Evidence-Based Policy: Basing policies on rigorous, unbiased scientific research that accounts for real-world conditions, not on "questionable research" or the agendas of specific lobby groups.

• Rethinking "Rewetting" and BNG: Re-evaluating large-scale "rewetting" projects that prove ineffective or damaging and ensuring BNG schemes genuinely benefit nature and local communities transparently and cost-effectively.

Ultimately, the problems caused by Natural England's current approach are said to outweigh its benefits. For the health of our Peak District moors and the resilience of our rural communities, a profound shift in approach is essential.

Let's champion the expertise of those who know the land best and ensure our moorlands are managed effectively for generations to come.

Keep Updated With Our FREE Newsletter

📧 Keep updated on all moorland issues - sign up for our regular free newsletter.

SIGN UP FREE