The role of fire in UK peatland and moorland management: the need for informed, unbiased debate

Abstract

Fire has been used for centuries to generate and manage some of the UK's cultural landscapes. Despite its complex role in the ecology of UK peatlands and moorlands, there has been a trend of simplifying the narrative around burning to present it as an only ecologically damaging practice. That fire modifies peatland characteristics at a range of scales is clearly understood. Whether these changes are perceived as positive or negative depends upon how trade-offs are made between ecosystem services and the spatial and temporal scales of concern. Here we explore the complex interactions and trade-offs in peatland fire management, evaluating the benefits and costs of managed fire as they are currently understood. We highlight the need for (i) distinguishing between the impacts of fires occurring with differing severity and frequency, and (ii) improved characterization of ecosystem health that incorporates the response and recovery of peatlands to fire. We also explore how recent research has been contextualized within both scientific publications and the wider media and how this can influence non-specialist perceptions. We emphasize the need for an informed, unbiased debate on fire as an ecological management tool that is separated from other aspects of moorland management and from political and economic opinions.This article is part of the themed issue ‘The interaction of fire and mankind’.

At the nexus of fire, water and society

“…Fewer studies of the effects of peatland fires on water supplies exist compared to the number of studies in forested water supply catchments [33,34]. Though groundwater constitutes 25-40% of the global drinking water supply [35], very little research has been conducted on fire effects on this drinking water source [36].…”

“…Denver spent $23 million USD to remove sediment from a critical water supply reservoir). The primary concern related to peatland burning is the potential to increase the release of DOC, particulate organic matter, suspended sediments, aluminium and iron [33,34,70,71]. The presence of DOC can lead to water discoloration [33,34] and the need for more chlorine to achieve adequate disinfection [72].…”

“…The primary concern related to peatland burning is the potential to increase the release of DOC, particulate organic matter, suspended sediments, aluminium and iron [33,34,70,71]. The presence of DOC can lead to water discoloration [33,34] and the need for more chlorine to achieve adequate disinfection [72]. The reaction of chlorine and DOC in treated water can lead to the formation of potentially carcinogenic tri-halomethanes or other disinfection by-products [14].The presence of metals in the dissolved phase or attached to suspended sediment requires advanced water-treatment processes [20,59].…”

Informed debate on the use of fire for peatland management means acknowledging the complexity of socio-ecological systems

“…via anthropogenic climate change). Disturbance (fire) effects (orange) were the focus of Davies et al (2016) whereas socio-economic decision-making (blue) were the focus of Monbiot (2016a). We argue that views in the blue region should not influence the interpretation of scientific data in the orange region.…”

“…Turetsky et al 2015) and the potential flexibility of prescribed burning as a management tool (Russell-Smith and Thornton 2003). We laid out our concerns in a recent paper "The role of fire in UK peatland and moorland management: the need for informed, unbiased debate" (Davies et al 2016), which has been the subject of subsequent discussion, debate, and no small amount of misrepresentation.…”