Wildfire Risk Is About Fuel and Fire Behaviour - Not Latitude

Andrew Gilruth
22 hours ago
4 min read

A recent Moorland Association social media post highlighted proposals within Greece’s draft “Active Fight” legislation to reintroduce and formalise prescribed burning as part of its national wildfire prevention framework.

The proposals would, for the first time, place prescribed burning on a clear statutory footing: delivered under strict regulatory control, jointly planned by forestry services and fire brigades, restricted to low-risk periods outside the fire season, and used explicitly to reduce fuel loads, improve ecosystem resilience and support firefighter training.

The purpose of the post was limited and straightforward. It sought to draw attention to an international policy development. Jurisdictions that have experienced severe wildfire impacts are increasingly reassessing suppression-only approaches and considering how fuel management, including carefully regulated use of fire, may contribute to risk reduction.

In response to that post, one of the named authors of Natural England’s 2025 review of heather burning (NEER155) commented publicly:

“Only this morning, I was asking myself, is there anywhere more eastern Mediterranean than the UK?”

While clearly rhetorical, this remark highlights a wider issue in current discussions about wildfire risk and land management.

A Mischaracterisation of the Argument

No party has suggested that the UK shares the climate, ecology or land-use history of the eastern Mediterranean. The comparison implied by the remark addresses a position that has not been advanced.

What has been argued - and is increasingly supported by evidence - is that the underlying drivers of wildfire risk in the UK are becoming more pronounced. These include:

the accumulation of continuous fine fuels
extended dry periods, particularly in spring and early summer
fires occurring outside historically recognised “fire seasons”
increasing pressure on Fire and Rescue Service capacity during extreme events

Wildfire science consistently demonstrates that fire behaviour is governed by the interaction of fuel, weather and topography, rather than latitude or regional classification (McMorrow et al 2009; Davies et al 2016; Gazzard et al 2016). These principles apply across a wide range of environments, including the British uplands.

Why International Experience Remains Relevant

The relevance of international experience does not depend on narrow climatic similarity. It depends on whether comparable risk mechanisms are present.

The UK’s own expert and government-commissioned assessments explicitly recognise that wildfire risk is shaped by fuel condition, fuel continuity, and weather extremes and that climate change is increasing the frequency of conditions conducive to severe fire behaviour (Belcher et al 2021; UK Climate Change Risk Assessment).

In that context, reference to international wildfire policy developments is not an argument for their direct transplantation into UK regulation. It is recognition that jurisdictions facing escalating wildfire impacts are reassessing the balance between suppression and prevention, particularly where fuel accumulation has been allowed to increase unmanaged risk.

Wildfire Risk in the UK Is Not Hypothetical

Wildfire already presents a material and documented risk in the UK. Recent experience includes:

large-scale fires on peat and heath, including Saddleworth Moor, Winter Hill Ashdown Forest and Langdale Moor.
incidents occurring earlier in the year and extending later into autumn.
repeated warnings from Fire and Rescue Services regarding fuel load, access and firefighter safety.
smoke impacts affecting communities, infrastructure and public health.

The UK’s Third Climate Change Risk Assessment and its supporting expert evidence identify wildfire as a cross-cutting risk affecting ecosystems, carbon stores, infrastructure, emergency services and human health, with severity expected to increase under future climate scenarios (Belcher et al 2021; UK Climate Change Risk Assessment).

The public-health implications of wildfire smoke are also well established within the evidence base already before government. Studies of peatland wildfires demonstrate significant associations between wildfire smoke exposure and increased cardiopulmonary emergency admissions (Rappold et al 2011; Tinling et al 2016). These impacts are repeatedly cited in UK policy discussions concerning wildfire and air quality.

Against that backdrop, dismissing international wildfire policy developments through rhetorical comparison risks narrowing, rather than informing, the policy discussion.

Evidence, Engagement and Policy Development

Natural England’s report on heather burning (NEER155) is frequently cited as a key evidence source informing current policy development. That makes careful engagement with wildfire science, operational realities and established risk mechanisms particularly important.

In recent months, stakeholders and practitioners have raised substantive questions concerning:

how wildfire risk is treated within NEER155.
the weighting given to operational fire science.
the treatment of fuel dynamics and fire behaviour.
implications for Fire and Rescue Services and public safety.

The Moorland Association has offered this Natural England report author the opportunity to respond to these issues through a structured and evidence-based contribution on our website. That invitation remains open.

Towards a More Constructive Policy Conversation

The Moorland Association continues to advocate for:

evidence-led wildfire policy.
a clear distinction between uncontrolled wildfire and regulated prescribed burning
integration of land management, fire services, environmental regulation and public-health considerations.
informed engagement with international experience, without caricature or oversimplification.

International examples are referenced not as prescriptions, but as illustrations of how wildfire risk is increasingly being addressed where fuel accumulation and climate change interact to produce more severe outcomes.

If wildfire policy in the UK is to remain credible, it must engage directly with fuel dynamics, fire behaviour and operational evidence. Wildfire responds to fuel, weather and management conditions, regardless of regional labels.

Those conditions are changing.

Note on legal proceedings

Nothing in this article seeks to comment on, pre-empt or influence matters currently before the courts. It is intended solely as a contribution to wider public discussion on wildfire risk and policy development.

References

Belcher, C.M. et al. (2021). UK Wildfires and their Climate Challenges. Expert report for the Third UK Climate Change Risk Assessment (CCRA3).
Davies, G.M. et al. (2016). Fire behaviour and vegetation flammability in UK uplands.
Gazzard, R. et al. (2016). Wildfires in the UK: management, risk and policy challenges. Forestry.
McMorrow, J. et al. (2009). Fire behaviour and the role of fuel, weather and topography.
Rappold, A.G. et al. (2011). Peat bog wildfire smoke exposure and cardiopulmonary emergency department visits.
Tinling, M.A. et al. (2016). Repeating cardiopulmonary health effects during peat wildfire events.
UK Climate Change Risk Assessment (2022).
Committee on Climate Change (2021). CCRA3 supporting evidence.