Wildfires in France

The EFFIS (European Forest Fire Information System) is also frequently cited in official historical comparisons. However, it provides systematic coverage for France only from 2006 onward.
When officials refer to “the most devastating wildfire of the past fifty years,” they are effectively referring to the 1973–2006 period, corresponding to the BDIFF’s partial Mediterranean coverage. For Gironde and Landes, however, the actual institutional record extends back only to 2006—that is, roughly twenty years of data. In other words, the wildfires of 2026 are being compared against a reference period that excludes the catastrophic events of 1949.

Strictly speaking, it is not incorrect to describe 2026 as a “historic record.” But such a statement says nothing about what occurred before the implementation of systematic—or even partial—records of burned areas. After all, 1949 is not ancient history. We are not talking about fires that took place in the Middle Ages.

As for the causes of these catastrophic wildfires, they are multiple, but in almost every case the human factor is predominant.

They include:

— The decline of agriculture since the 1970s, together with the natural expansion of forests, which has made the landscapes of southeastern France increasingly conducive to large wildfires;

— Growing urban development along the edges of forested areas, multiplying opportunities for fire ignition;

— Deliberate and accidental human-caused fires, whether started by arsonists, by someone carelessly tossing a cigarette butt out of a car window, or by sparks generated during brush-clearing operations carried out in the middle of a drought. (So much for “ecological” or “selective” mowing, by the way. It is of little comfort to the insects and other small wildlife whose habitat in the tall grass was supposedly being preserved when everything ends up going up in smoke.)

— The wildfire suppression paradox: when small and medium-sized fires are extinguished immediately, the biomass that would otherwise have been consumed accumulates over time. This effect is even more pronounced in extensive pine plantations, whose highly flammable nature further amplifies the problem. The rare fires that overwhelm the firefighting capacity designed to deal with routine outbreaks are therefore fueled by decades of accumulated vegetation. Once they escape initial suppression, they become naturally enormous and cause catastrophic destruction.

Following the disaster of 1949, large-scale reforestation programs and systematic fire suppression policies were implemented. Arguably, they worked almost too well—especially when combined with agricultural abandonment and the now widespread notion that forests should simply be left to develop with minimal human intervention.

For seven decades, combustible biomass accumulated. When meteorological conditions—driven by atmospheric blocking patterns for which no statistically significant increase has been demonstrated—make wildfire suppression impossible, only a minor ignition source is needed for the situation to descend into what is, quite literally, an inferno. “Catastrophic anthropogenic climate change” makes for a convenient explanation. Human actions are indeed at the heart of these disasters, but the relevant actions are politically uncomfortable to acknowledge. It is far easier to blame ordinary people for flying or eating meat than to implement sustained forest management and fuel reduction policies.