A large wildfire that engulfed nearly 1,000 acres of moorland on Tintwistle Moor near Glossop, Derbyshire, has reignited debate over land management practices and their role in wildfire prevention. The blaze, which began on the evening of June 24 amid record-high temperatures, prompted a multi-agency response involving numerous fire engines and two helicopters conducting water drops. The fire was brought under control by June 26, but its cause remains undetermined.
The incident has drawn attention to recent changes in land management regulations, particularly restrictions on controlled burning. These restrictions, introduced last year and affecting over 1.6 million acres—primarily peatlands—aim to protect air quality and promote environmental health by limiting burning practices historically used to manage vegetation.
Critics of the restrictions argue that the curbs have inadvertently increased the risk of more severe and uncontrollable wildfires by allowing significant accumulations of dry vegetation, known as fuel loads, to build up. Richard Bailey, a veteran gamekeeper, testified before the Environment Select Committee warning that unmanaged vegetation creates hotter and more dangerous fires, potentially leading to fatalities. He and other land managers maintain that controlled burns, when carefully planned and executed, reduce fuel loads, encourage new growth, and help prevent large-scale wildfires.
Supporters of controlled burning, including representatives from the British Association for Shooting and Conservation and the Country Landowners and Business Association, highlight that regulations have made it increasingly difficult to obtain permits for such burns, limiting the ability of those familiar with the land to manage it effectively. They express concern that these policies may have unintended consequences, such as creating conditions more susceptible to fires, particularly during hotter, drier weather linked to climate change. Alex Farrell of BASC described controlled cool burning as “part of the solution” rather than a threat.
On the other hand, Natural England and other environmental agencies favor mechanical cutting over burning to manage vegetation impacts on peatlands, emphasizing the importance of protecting carbon-storing habitats. A spokesman for United Utilities, which owns the affected moorland, stated the company supports the fire service's efforts and uses site-specific vegetation management, including cutting, aiming to restore peatlands to healthier, wetter conditions that are less vulnerable to fire.
The debate extends to wider policy discussions. Labour’s Shadow Environment Secretary, Victoria Atkins, criticized restrictions on controlled burning as overly idealistic and detached from practical land management realities, while others advocate for stronger wildfire prevention strategies. Labour MP Alison Hume, chair of a newly formed All-Party Parliamentary Group on Wildfire Prevention, called for the urgent publication of a national wildfire strategy and highlighted the need for coordinated local action to manage vegetation and reduce fire risks.
Some critics link rewilding policies, which promote minimal human intervention in natural landscapes, to the increased wildfire danger. Andrew Gilruth of the Moorlands Association attributed the fire in part to vegetation accumulation on land under rewilding management, suggesting that reduced human control has contributed to tinder-dry conditions.
As climate patterns evolve, with rising temperatures and extended dry periods, land managers, policymakers, and environmental groups face ongoing challenges. Balancing peatland preservation, biodiversity, and wildfire mitigation remains a complex and contested issue, intensified by the recent Derbyshire wildfire and the broader increase in wildfire incidents recorded in recent years across the UK.