A group of prominent scientists and practitioners have said there is ‘no clear scientific consensus to support a blanket ban against controlled vegetation burning on heather moorland’ and that ‘policy decisions are being influenced by special interest groups who regularly ignore or distort evidence in order to outlaw the practice’.

The Wildlife Management and Muirburn Bill is currently at the first stage in the Scottish Parliament. The Bill will strictly regulate the use of muirburn, the controlled burning of vegetation, on peatland.

READ MORE: New wildlife bill from Scottish Parliament will protect raptors

Licenses for burning on peat will only be granted in exceptional circumstances, such as for wildfire prevention if it becomes law. The Future Landscapes Forum (FLF), a consortium of academics and experts in upland management, has published a position statement expressing their growing concerns that the debate about managing heather moorlands, including on peatlands, is neither properly informed nor evidence-based, leading to dangerous policy decisions that ignore the positive social and ecological effects of controlled burning.

The group says these decisions disregard a large body of evidence showing that controlled burning can support wildfire prevention, carbon capture, and biodiversity improvement. Moreover, risks and impacts of alternatives like cutting or no vegetation management remain largely unknown and are often ignored.

“We simply do not have the evidence to say that cutting, rewetting, or a cessation of vegetation management are always better at reducing the risk of wildfires, capturing carbon and maintaining biodiversity. On the contrary, the existing evidence is that controlled burning can often contribute to all of these important aspects,” said Dr Andreas Heinemeyer, an Associate Professor at the University of York and member of the FLF.

“We are calling for policymakers to adopt an adaptive management approach towards heather-dominated landscapes. We support regulations that steer practitioners towards good standards of controlled burning and encourage better communication links between policymakers and those leading research into the management of the UK’s heather-dominated landscapes,” Heinemeyer added.

The FLF says that the debate around managing heather moorlands has become derailed by an undue focus on the issue of driven grouse shooting.

The group says this focus is wrong and has led to highly reductive arguments against controlled burning being presented as scientific consensus by influential individuals and organisations.

“The management of heather-dominated landscapes is about so much more than grouse shooting. Frankly, we would be making the case for controlled burning if grouse, and grouse shooting, did not exist. But certain groups are so preoccupied with this issue that they ignore all the evidence in favour of controlled burning and the risks of the alternatives, especially considering wildfires” continued Heinemeyer.

“We believe that judgements on the management of heather-dominated landscapes should be made according to all the available scientific evidence, consider its quality and uninfluenced by positions on grouse shooting.”

Scottish Land and Estates have been arguing the case for muirburn.

READ MORE: Summit hears industry argue muirburn an important tool

Ross Ewing, Moorland Director at Scottish Land & Estates, said: “Muirburn is hugely beneficial, not only for upland estates, but for farmers and crofters managing habitat for livestock and ground nesting birds. It also reduces the build-up of vegetation (fuel load) which increases wildfire risk.

“The latest scientific studies are recognising the value of muirburn, including a recent University of York report which found that burnt plots became carbon sinks after burning and, over the 10 years, absorbed more than twice the amount of carbon compared to mown and unmanaged areas.

“The risk of uncontrolled wildfire and the huge carbon emissions that come with that – not to mention the risk to life, property and habitats – will be far greater if the Scottish Government does not take a sensible, informed approach on muirburn. That is why the Scottish Fire & Rescue Service continues to support muirburn as a mechanism for reducing fuel load – to avoid the sort of wildfire we saw in the Flow Country in 2019 which is estimated to have released 700,000 tonnes of CO2 equivalent into the atmosphere, doubling Scotland’s greenhouse gas emissions in the six days it burnt.

"We hold our own concerns regarding the proposals put forward by government, in particular restrictions on muirburn on peat deeper than 40cm. This is an arbitrary figure chosen by the Scottish Government without a shred of supporting evidence or logic – especially when you consider that muirburn is recognised to be an ‘above ground’ activity that does not protrude below the surface.

“All too often, opposition to muirburn is driven by attempts to restrict and prohibit legitimate practices associated with grouse moor management, irrespective of what the latest science suggests and wildfire experts say. We are pleased that in this new report, scientists are recognising the value of muirburn to the environment and are willing to put that firmly on record.”

The Scottish Government were contacted for comment but did not answer the phone.