8th November 2026
Scotland has spent years recognising the importance of its peatlands as natural carbon stores. Millions of pounds are being invested in restoring damaged bogs, blocking drainage channels and encouraging the return of vegetation that helps keep carbon locked safely underground.
Yet there is another aspect of moorland management that deserves closer attention: the deliberate burning of heather, often referred to as muirburn.
The practice has a long history in Scotland, particularly on grouse moors, where burning is used to encourage fresh heather growth and create different vegetation heights. It is also used in some circumstances to manage grazing and habitats.
But as the climate changes, should Scotland be reconsidering how frequently it burns its moorlands, particularly where deep peat lies beneath the vegetation?
The concern is not simply about the smoke and carbon released when heather burns. It is about what might happen if fire penetrates the peat itself, releasing carbon that has accumulated over thousands of years.
Scotland's enormous carbon store
Peatlands cover more than 20% of Scotland and contain an estimated 1.6 billion tonnes of carbon. They represent one of the country's most important natural carbon stores.
Healthy peat forms when waterlogged conditions prevent dead vegetation from fully decomposing. Over thousands of years, layers of organic material accumulate, locking away carbon that would otherwise return to the atmosphere.
The importance of this landscape is particularly evident in Caithness and Sutherland.
The Flow Country, which received UNESCO World Heritage status in 2024, is the world's most outstanding example of a blanket bog ecosystem. Its peatlands have been accumulating for around 9,000 years and contain an estimated 400 million tonnes of carbon within the World Heritage property.
Some peat deposits reach eight metres in depth.
This is an extraordinary natural resource, but it is also vulnerable. Drainage, inappropriate land management, erosion and fire can damage peatlands, turning areas that previously stored carbon into sources of greenhouse gas emissions.
When a heather fire becomes a peat fire
Muirburn is generally intended to burn surface vegetation rather than the underlying peat.
When properly controlled and undertaken in suitable conditions, a fire can remove older heather and encourage fresh growth. Supporters argue that this helps maintain particular moorland habitats and provides suitable vegetation for red grouse.
However, there is an important distinction between burning surface vegetation and allowing fire to penetrate dry peat.
Peat fires can be particularly difficult to extinguish. Rather than producing dramatic flames, they can smoulder underground, sometimes continuing for days or weeks. They may spread beneath the surface and reappear some distance from where the fire originally started.
The consequences can be substantial. Carbon accumulated over thousands of years can be released into the atmosphere in a relatively short period.
There is also a danger that a controlled burn, if conditions change or the fire escapes, could become a much larger wildfire.
The risks increase when vegetation and underlying soils are unusually dry, particularly during periods of prolonged sunshine, low rainfall and strong winds.
Scotland has already experienced a warning
The seriousness of this threat became much clearer following the enormous wildfire on Dava Moor in the Highlands during the summer of 2025.
The fire covered approximately 10,000 hectares, making it the UK's first megafire under a commonly used definition based on the area burned.
Research published in the scientific journal Nature Geoscience in May 2026 examined the environmental consequences.
The researchers estimated that the fire released around 38,600 tonnes of carbon, although there is considerable uncertainty around the estimate. Most strikingly, they calculated that peat combustion accounted for nearly 85% of the total emissions.
The fire occurred after unusually dry conditions. Soil moisture in the affected area was significantly below its normal level, leaving vegetation and peat more vulnerable to burning.
The researchers warned that warmer and drier conditions could make severe fires increasingly important in northern peatland ecosystems.
This fire was not evidence that routine heather burning necessarily causes major wildfires. Its importance is that it demonstrated how vulnerable Scottish peatlands can become when conditions are sufficiently dry.
It should encourage a closer examination of all land management practices that involve fire.
Indonesia offers another warning
Scotland is not alone in having extensive peatlands, but countries such as Indonesia provide a particularly important example of what can happen when peat dries out.
Indonesia has experienced devastating peat fires, particularly during strong El Niño weather events.
Large areas of tropical peatland have been drained to make land available for agriculture and other development. Once the water table falls, peat becomes much more vulnerable to ignition.
The fires can spread underground and release enormous quantities of carbon, while producing smoke that affects millions of people.
The 2015 Indonesian fires were particularly severe. Research estimated that emissions from fires across equatorial Asia that year reached approximately 0.51 billion tonnes of carbon.
Studies have subsequently demonstrated how drainage, groundwater levels and soil moisture influence the likelihood and severity of peat fires.
The comparison with Scotland needs to be treated carefully. Indonesia has a tropical climate, different land-use pressures and much larger areas of drained peatland. Scotland is not facing the same circumstances.
Nevertheless, the underlying lesson is relevant: keeping peat wet is fundamental to protecting the carbon stored within it.
El Niño adds another reason for caution
The developing El Niño is another factor worth watching.
The World Meteorological Organization reported in September 2026 that El Niño was firmly established and expected to strengthen, potentially becoming a very strong event and continuing into early 2027.
El Niño can influence rainfall and temperature patterns around the world, although its effects differ considerably between regions.
In Indonesia, strong El Niño events have historically contributed to conditions that encourage extensive peat fires.
It would be wrong to assume that Scotland will automatically experience the same consequences. El Niño does not translate into a straightforward prediction of drought in the Highlands.
However, the wider climate trend is important. Scotland is experiencing a changing climate, and the possibility of longer or more intense periods of dry weather needs to be considered when deciding how land should be managed.
A burning regime developed around historical weather conditions may not carry the same level of risk in the future.
Scotland has introduced new restrictions
There have already been significant changes to the rules governing muirburn.
The Wildlife Management and Muirburn (Scotland) Act 2024 introduced a new licensing system, which came into effect on 15 September 2026.
Anyone wishing to carry out muirburn now requires a licence from NatureScot.
Importantly, the rules distinguish between peatland and non-peatland.
On non-peatland, burning can be licensed for purposes including managing moorland wildlife, improving grazing and managing the natural environment.
On peatland, the permitted purposes are much more restricted. They include peatland restoration, wildfire prevention, research and training. Burning must be considered both appropriate and necessary.
Routine burning to manage grouse moors is not included as a permitted purpose on peatland.
Applications involving peatland must also explain the proposed scale of burning, the risks and why the desired outcome cannot be achieved on non-peatland.
These changes recognise that peatland requires particular protection. However, the effectiveness of the new system will depend on how licences are assessed, how conditions are monitored and whether sufficient resources are available to enforce the rules.
Should Scotland go further?
There is a legitimate debate about whether controlled heather burning has a continuing role in some forms of moorland management.
Land managers and grouse shooting interests argue that carefully managed burning can create a varied habitat, encourage fresh vegetation and help reduce accumulated fuel in certain circumstances.
Conservation organisations have raised concerns about the effects of burning on peat formation, vegetation, wildlife and the ability of peatlands to store carbon.
It is important to recognise that not all moorland is the same. Some areas have deep peat, others have shallow soils, and some are predominantly heathland rather than active bog.
A blanket prohibition on every form of vegetation burning would therefore be a different proposition from restricting burning on vulnerable peatland.
Nevertheless, several questions deserve attention.
Should there be a stronger presumption against burning wherever deep peat is present?
Should land managers be required to demonstrate more clearly that burning will not damage the underlying peat?
Could alternative methods of vegetation management achieve the same objectives without introducing the risks associated with fire?
And should wildfire prevention plans place greater emphasis on restoring water levels, blocking drainage channels and maintaining healthy peatland rather than relying on further burning?
These are questions that deserve proper scientific examination rather than simply being treated as an argument between grouse shooting interests and conservation organisations.
Protecting the Flow Country for future generations
For Caithness and Sutherland, this is more than an abstract environmental discussion.
The Flow Country is an internationally recognised natural asset. Its World Heritage status brings recognition to an area that has been accumulating peat for thousands of years.
It also creates a responsibility to protect the landscape and the natural processes that make it so important.
Scotland is already spending substantial sums restoring damaged peatlands. It would make little sense to undermine that investment through land management that unnecessarily increases the risk of carbon loss.
The Dava Moor fire demonstrated that Scotland cannot assume its peatlands are naturally protected against major fires simply because they are traditionally wet.
The challenge is to anticipate how the risks might change rather than wait until another major fire provides the next warning.
Scotland has spent thousands of years building up its peatlands and only a relatively short time recognising their value. We should be careful not to lose that accumulated carbon through management practices that may need reconsidering as the climate changes.
The question is no longer simply whether heather burning has a place in traditional moorland management. It is whether that practice remains appropriate in every location, given the growing importance of peatland protection and the changing risks of wildfire.
For a country that wants to be recognised as a leader in protecting natural carbon stores, that is a question worth asking.
Indonesia: when peat fires make the air dangerous to breathe
During 2026, extensive fires across Indonesian peatlands and forests created serious air pollution in several provinces.
The worst affected areas included:
- West Kalimantan: Pontianak and surrounding communities experienced persistent smoke and hazardous air pollution.
- Central Kalimantan: Palangka Raya experienced weeks of severe haze, with schools closing and residents reporting breathing difficulties.
- South Sumatra: Smoke affected communities around Palembang and other areas.
- Riau: Air pollution became particularly severe around Pekanbaru.
The Jakarta Post reported in August that more than three million people across 37 cities and regencies had been directly exposed to wildfire smoke. In Riau, PM2.5 pollution reached 235.7 micrograms per cubic metre, more than 15 times the WHO recommended 24-hour guideline.
People have taken the government to court
One particularly interesting development is that residents of West Kalimantan have taken legal action against their own government.
A group of residents and civil society organisations brought a class action alleging that the authorities had failed to prevent and adequately respond to the fires.
Their argument is that people have a right to clean air and a healthy environment.
Residents described smoke entering their homes, children becoming ill, schools closing and ordinary outdoor activities becoming difficult.
The case names President Prabowo Subianto and 26 other government officials and institutions.
There have also been demonstrations in several Indonesian cities, with protesters demanding stronger action against the fires.
CNA
The health consequences are substantial
A report published by Mongabay on 2 November 2026 highlighted the growing health consequences.
Indonesia's Health Ministry had recorded 333,470 acute respiratory infection cases in seven of the worst-affected provinces between August and October.
The Centre for Research on Energy and Clean Air estimated that short-term exposure to wildfire pollution contributed to approximately 5,200 deaths during August and September.
That figure is a modelled estimate, not a count of individually confirmed deaths, but it illustrates the potential scale of the public-health consequences.
The pollution has also travelled beyond Indonesia, affecting Malaysia and Singapore.
Why this matters to Scotland
Peatland fires are not simply an environmental problem involving carbon emissions. They can become a serious public-health issue.
There are three lessons worth drawing:
1. Carbon storage: Once peat burns, carbon accumulated over thousands of years can be released.
2. Air quality: Smoke contains fine particles capable of penetrating deep into the lungs, creating particular risks for children and older people.
3. Economic consequences: Fires can close schools, disrupt businesses, affect transport and impose substantial costs on health services.
Scotland does not have Indonesia's tropical conditions or the same scale of peatland drainage. We should not suggest that the two countries face identical risks.
But the underlying science is relevant to both.