MPs Back Moorland Managers and Demand Action on Wildfire Risk
Quick summary
The EFRA Committee’s wildfire report, published 21 October, supports several arguments made by the MA and members.
MPs say peatland restoration alone cannot manage hazardous fuel loads now, and burning remains one available tool.
The Committee wants the wildfire effects of burning restrictions assessed and the struggling licensing system improved.
MPs want gamekeepers and land managers heard, including at the Prime Minister’s wildfire summit and a Defra roundtable.
Thank you to everyone who contributed to the EFRA Committee’s Wildfire Inquiry, including MA members, gamekeepers, their families, the Regional Moorland Groups and our partner organisations.
We know how often you are asked to respond to consultations and calls for evidence, and how much time that takes. Members deserve to see what comes of that effort.
The Committee launched its wildfire inquiry in April, with submissions closing on 18 May. Almost 70% of the submissions it received came from individual land managers. Five months later, their experiences are prominent in its report, which recognises the emotional toll on families and the extraordinary voluntary contribution of those who prevent and fight wildfires.
Published on 21 October, A burning issue: managing wildfire risk from the House of Commons Environment, Food and Rural Affairs (EFRA) Committee supports several arguments advanced by the MA and our members. MPs recognise the need for immediate fuel management, include controlled burning among the available tools, and call for a more effective licensing system.
Committee Chairman Alistair Carmichael MP reinforced that message, calling on the Government to start listening to and respecting communities directly affected by wildfires. It is welcome recognition of the experience our members have been sharing for years.
Restoration needs practical fuel management
The Committee supports peatland restoration and recognises its long-term benefits. It also acknowledges that those benefits may take years, and sometimes decades, to be fully realised.
Its conclusion is clear:
“Wildfire risk is increasing now, and peatland restoration alone does not address the immediate challenge of managing hazardous fuel loads in the short-term.”
Paragraph 160
Fuel loads are the vegetation and other material available to burn. The Committee says the immediate risks from that material need to be managed while restoration proceeds.
MPs do not prescribe one technique for every site. They recognise that burning, cutting, grazing and rewetting each have a role. For the MA, this supports an approach in which managers can choose the appropriate combination for the ground, conditions and risks they face.
The practical question for Defra and Natural England is what management they will enable over the next two years to reduce those risks.
The wildfire effects of burning restrictions need scrutiny
The Committee is concerned that the wildfire implications of expanding burning restrictions were not assessed as rigorously as the implications for peatland, biodiversity and carbon.
It asks the Government to explain what assessment was undertaken before the 2025 regulations were implemented. If none was undertaken, it recommends commissioning and publishing one within three months.
The Committee also questions why England has adopted a 30 cm peat-depth threshold for burning restrictions when Scotland continues to use 40 cm, asking whether this reflects different policy judgements or different interpretations of the scientific evidence.
MPs also recommend reviewing the regulations when the findings of the IDEAL UK Fire research programme become available.
For the MA, a proper assessment must consider the risk that remains when management is restricted, alongside the risks and benefits of the available interventions. Where a proposed burn cannot proceed, there should be a realistic assessment of what alternative will manage the vegetation and how it can be delivered.
Burning licences must work on the ground
The report records evidence from the Minister that 24 burning licence applications had been submitted over the preceding twelve months, with two approved.
The Committee concludes that these figures suggest the regime is operating less effectively than intended. It identifies potential problems with the application process and guidance, and says it will monitor whether changes improve the system for applicants.
Members need clear requirements, timely decisions and conditions that allow the authorised work to be carried out. The effectiveness of a licence must be judged by what it enables a land manager to do.
The MA will use the Committee’s findings to press for practical improvements, drawing on members’ experience of applying for and attempting to use licences.
Prevention needs usable powers and practical support
The report also addresses barriers beyond burning. It records the MA’s concern that existing powers are not always used early or consistently during periods of high wildfire risk. The Committee concludes that restrictions on access and activities can be slow to implement and insufficiently proactive.
This strengthens the MA's case for reviewing how Section 25 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act operates, including Natural England's guidance on temporary access restrictions during periods of high wildfire risk. The powers exist, but they need to be capable of being used before conditions become exceptionally dangerous.
MPs also recommend removing barriers to wildfire suppression ponds, including within National Parks, and recognising wildfire resilience as a public good in agri-environment funding. They want support to help deliver practical prevention measures and recommend funding for fire wardens in areas of high risk.
Gamekeepers and land managers must be heard
The Committee recognises the expertise, equipment and voluntary effort that land managers, farmers and gamekeepers contribute to preventing and fighting wildfires. It also records the emotional burden on those responding and on their families.
It says that contribution is inadequately reflected in current policy and calls for future policies to be developed in partnership with those affected. It specifically recommends including gamekeepers and land managers in the Prime Minister’s wildfire summit.
The report also calls for Defra and Natural England to hold a roundtable within six months, covering trust, transparency of policy decisions, scientific evidence and the operation of burning licences.
The priority now is delivery
These are recommendations from a cross-party parliamentary committee. Existing legal requirements remain in force, and the Government must now respond.
The MA will now use the report to press Defra and Natural England for a proper assessment of the wildfire implications of burning restrictions, improvements to the licensing system, and a review of the practical barriers to wildfire prevention, including access restrictions. We will also seek to ensure that the experience of moorland managers is properly represented in the proposed wildfire summit and subsequent discussions with regulators.
Parliament currently lists the Government’s response as due by 21 December 2026. We will examine that response against the Committee’s recommendations and keep members informed.
This report gives substantial support to the case our members have made. The next test is whether it leads to timely decisions, usable permissions and practical support for protecting our moorlands.
