"Never drained" and "immune to fire"? The New Forest is neither: our Letter to The Spectator

Photo by Ben Russell

Sir: One of Ben Goldsmith’s principal examples undermines his own case (‘Rewilding is the best defence against wildfires’, 2 August).

He repeats the false claim that the New Forest’s open heaths were “never drained”. Yet the National Park’s own plans record that mires, wet heath and lawns were historically drained and are now being restored. Nor does he mention what else actually happens there. The Forest is actively managed through grazing, cutting and controlled burning.

Forestry England deliberately burns areas during winter and spring, while the National Park Authority warns that the Forest’s heathland and peat remain vulnerable to serious wildfire. The claim that it is “largely immune to fire” is therefore plainly wrong.

The New Forest is an example of effective, integrated land management - not evidence that rewilding can replace it.

When Goldsmith asks whether policymakers “will finally have the courage to confront the nonsense”, those managing fire-prone landscapes and fighting wildfires on them are asking precisely the same question.

Andrew Gilruth

Chief Executive Moorland Association