Dartmoor faces millions in restoration costs without action on wildfire risk

Dartmoor could face restoration costs of more than £4 million if severe wildfires break out this September, according to new analysis by carbon insurance firm Artio. 

The study warns that the moor’s cultural heritage, wildlife and carbon stores are all at risk unless stronger fire prevention measures are put in place.

The warning comes as the Met Office reports that this could be the warmest UK summer on record, with dry conditions extending into September.

READ NEXT: Campaign to safeguard Dartmoor’s iconic Hill Ponies gains fresh momentum

Using drought and fire spread statistics, Artio projects that wildfires on Dartmoor could release over 77,000 tonnes of CO2, with a carbon value of £1.9 million, and damage more than 800 hectares of land. 

The fires could also destroy an estimated 42,000 tonnes of biomass.

A significant ignition point was identified within Dartmoor National Park, raising concerns that even a single spark from a barbecue, cigarette or lightning strike could trigger a fast-moving blaze during high-risk conditions.

Bilal Hussain, CEO of Artio, said: “Without decisive preventative measures, fires in places like Dartmoor could erase years of carbon sequestration in a matter of days and leave behind millions in restoration costs. Proactive risk planning is the only way to protect the carbon, communities and ecosystems that these landscapes support.”

The South West Peatland Partnership is currently investing £13 million to restore 2,600 hectares of degraded peatland on Dartmoor.

However Artio cautions that these gains could be undone in a single fire season if risks are not managed effectively.

Clarences of Dartmoor commented on Facebook: “Sadly due to cuts in funding to National Parks by successive governments, the resources available to reduce wildfire risks are diminishing. e.g. We now have fewer park rangers able to educate and regulate visitors who frequently light fires. The costs identified in this report dwarf the National Park Authority's entire budget. No one seems to be taking a strategic view on this, which is very sad.”