RSPB urging the public to report moorland burning: both irresponsible and divisive

A recent press release distributed by the RPSB to various papers and media organisations has been, once again, recruiting member of the public to ‘report incidents of moorland burning on peatlands’ using their app or website.

This isn’t the first time the RSPB have encouraged the public to log incidents of burning, however the topic has of course been subject to more scrutiny this year due to the new laws in England which mean that (as of September 2025) a licence is required to burn in areas where peat is deeper than 30cm, rather than the previous 40cm.

This is most likely why the RSPB have resurrected this campaign, in a bid to encourage more division between those who use controlled burns to manage the uplands and other vegetated areas, and members of the public who are being misled by the RSPB.

The campaign is seemingly designed to encourage people to think that all prescribed burning is ‘bad’, using phrases such as “illegal and unsustainable burning” and stating that “80% of our peatlands are in degraded condition… due to historic damaging land management practices, including repeated burning.” This divisive language leads people to think that current management practices are continuing to degrade peatlands, despite the fact that prescribed burning does not damage peat, and ignoring the fact that managed upland landscapes are home to so many red and amber-listed species, through their own choice.  

Not withstanding the number of incorrect and misleading statements in the press release, the RSPB encouraging people to carry out a ‘citizen approach’ to monitoring prescribed burns is also highly irresponsible. As Dr Andreas Heinemeyer – who has dedicated over 15 years to research on peatlands as Associate Professor at the University of York, has previously warned – encouraging members of the public to carry out their own tests of peat depth risks damaging it themselves.

Further still, there are fears that encouraging members of the public to think that prescribed burns are ‘bad’ and should be ‘reported’ will lead them to calling out the fire and rescue services unnecessarily. Gamekeepers and land managers already work closely with the fire services, liaising about when and where prescribed burns are being carried out. The last thing our pressed and overworked emergency services need are callouts to ‘wildfires’ when, in fact, these burns are under control and of no concern to the fire service.