My op-ed for the Farmers Guardian published 2.02.26.
Last summer, wildfires raged across Langdale Moor, scorching the landscape and exposing a deeper truth about who our nation truly values. As my constituents remember, the blaze escalated into a major incident on 11 August, drawing emergency resources from across the country and testing our fire services to the limit. Yet it also laid bare how little support rural communities in North Yorkshire receive when disaster strikes.
Across the North York Moors, farmers, gamekeepers, local landowners and volunteers stepped forward with tractors, tankers and sheer determination. Their swift action helped cut firebreaks, doused the flames and safeguarded livestock and livelihoods, slowing the spread across the tinder-dry moorland and protecting nearby communities.
Despite their vital role, they have too often been left to bear the financial burden alone. I met with relevant Government officials at the time and pressed for national support so that North Yorkshire taxpayers - and rural communities - weren’t forced to shoulder the full cost. This is not a political issue, it is one of fairness. I worked alongside my neighbouring MP for Scarborough and Whitby, Alison Hume on this matter and we have both maintained ongoing communication to advocate for fair recognition and practical help.
Back in December, I also wrote directly to the DEFRA Secretary of State urging a rethink on dedicated support for those affected. This included a call for a Wildfire Recovery Fund to ensure farmers, gamekeepers, graziers and volunteers who acted as first responders were not left out of pocket.
Research shows that in 2025 the area burned in UK wildfires set new records and, in upland environments like Langdale, the risks are compounded by continuous fuel loads and limited access for firefighting equipment. While climate change is beyond any single community’s control, preparation, prevention and support are not. Moreover, the management of moorland must be urgently addressed.
Moorland is a managed landscape and must continue to be managed if we want it to remain in the enhanced habitat state we see today. The reason our moorlands are in their current condition is the collective management taking place, whether by mechanical means or through approved moorland management burning plans. I worry that adopting a no-burning approach would lead to a build-up of vegetation and woody stock. This is itself a negative influence on the sustainability of heather for bird species of all kinds, but what is perhaps worse is that overgrown heather becomes far more prone to catching fire in the natural cycle. When it does, it leads to huge and far more damaging wildfires, which are costly to communities and hugely damaging to the environment.
A series of smaller and cooler man-made fires, agreed and signed off via an approved moorland management burning plan, is therefore vital for enhancing the ecological status of moorland, improving the complex and desirable mosaic of habitats and significantly reducing the risk of dangerous unplanned fires. Once we understand that burning is the management of a natural process and not destruction for destruction’s sake, it is far harder to justify banning it.
I am therefore disappointed by the Government's decision to further restrict controlled burning, including lowering the peat depth threshold for restrictions and requiring licences in more areas. This approach ignores warnings from the National Fire Chiefs Council, the NFU and land managers. The NFU warned that such proposals risk “significantly increasing the risk of wildfire in upland areas, putting people, livestock and the environment in danger.” The National Fire Chiefs Council warned that they “could inadvertently lead to increased fire loads and the risk of larger, more intense wildfires” and “compromise Fire and Rescue Service preparedness and response, increasing the danger to firefighters.” The Government's decision illustrates a deep disregard and total naivety associated with improving the health of our precious peatlands and moorland habitats, including concerns over restrictions imposed by Natural England that can increase the risk of fire spread.
Farmers and rural communities are on the front line of that reality. They know the landscape, they live with the risks and, when the alarm sounded on Langdale Moor, they acted. This is why I’ve started my campaign for fair recognition, proper compensation, and long-term national support for rural communities affected by wildfires. But on support and compensation, the Government’s response has been disappointing. Despite repeated calls - and even a donation page which raised thousands - there is still no dedicated fund to recompense those who were out there, often at personal cost, helping to protect their community.
If we are serious about reducing wildfire risk and mitigating the effects when they occur, we need better national coordination, data-driven forecasting, consistent definitions and proper funding support for communities. Farmers shouldn’t have to feel forgotten as they often seem to be by this Government. During the Langdale Moor incident, rural communities didn’t wait for orders - they acted with courage and proper Yorkshire common sense. Now we need a Government that matches that spirit with support: dedicated compensation for those left out of pocket, enhanced adaptation measures and a coherent, well-resourced approach to wildfire risk across the UK.
If we truly value our countryside, we must value the people who protect them. And when disaster strikes, words of thanks are all well and good, but real support matters more.
Sign my Wildfire Support Petition here, which I will take directly to the Government. The petition will run until the end of March.
