Wildfire Risk, Evidence and Transparency: Why We Are Publishing Natural England’s “Lines to Take”

Andrew Gilruth
3 days ago
3 min read

Wildfire risk is no longer a marginal or theoretical issue in England’s uplands. It is an increasingly significant risk to people, wildlife, infrastructure and public services. Wildfire is driven by climate change, fuel accumulation and more volatile weather patterns.

For that reason, wildfire risk featured prominently in responses to Defra’s 2025 consultation on changes to the heather and grass burning regulations. Fire and Rescue Services, land managers and others raised concerns about fuel load, the loss of preventative tools and the consequences of restricting winter management without proven alternatives in place.

Defra, as the decision-maker, ultimately introduced the new Regulations. Natural England did not. That distinction matters, and we are careful to respect it.

However, Natural England is Defra’s statutory adviser on the natural environment, and its advice, framing and internal assessments form part of the wider policy environment in which ministerial decisions are made.

The document we are publishing

This document, “Lines to Take on Wildfire” (August 2025), was released by Natural England following a Freedom of Information request. It is therefore a document that Natural England itself has accepted is disclosable in the public interest.

We are publishing it in full, without commentary or editing, to ensure transparency and allow readers to form their own views.

Download Document

Why this document is of public interest

The document is not a technical wildfire risk assessment. It is a communications document. In it, Natural England:

recognises that wildfires are a “live and significant issue”
acknowledges reputational risks associated with stakeholder criticism
sets out an approach of avoiding reactive engagement on wildfire risk
instead promotes a proactive narrative focused on nature recovery as a means of reducing wildfire risk

We make no claim that this document represents Defra policy, nor that it proves any individual acted improperly. It would be wrong to suggest that.

What the document does do is provide insight into how wildfire risk was being framed institutionally within one of Defra’s principal advisory bodies at a critical time - not as a question of contested evidence or uncertainty, but as an issue to be managed through messaging.

Why this matters

Wildfire risk is not solely a conservation issue. It is a public safety issue. It affects:

Fire and Rescue Service capacity
Air quality and public health
Carbon emissions from uncontrolled fires
The safety of rural communities, infrastructure and water catchments

Where risks are acknowledged but treated primarily as communications challenges, there is a danger that legitimate scientific and operational disagreement is discounted rather than examined.

In policy areas characterised by uncertainty and rapidly changing conditions, good decision-making depends on:

Open engagement with competing evidence
Willingness to test assumptions
Transparency about how risks are weighed and addressed

The publication of this document helps explain why many stakeholders felt that concerns about wildfire risk were not meaningfully engaged with during and after the consultation process.

Our position

We continue to believe that:

Wildfire risk must be treated as a central policy consideration, not a peripheral one
Fuel management decisions should be evaluated on their real-world effects, including unintended consequences
Transparency strengthens, rather than undermines, public confidence in environmental decision-making

We are publishing this document in that spirit.