In the Face of Wildfires, Farmer François Letierce Advocates for Agriculture as the Ideal Firebreak

Fires have already ravaged more than 42,000 hectares in Gironde. For François Letierce, a farmer-entrepreneur based in the heart of the Landes massif for over fifty years, the worst may be yet to come: he fears that the fires will consume "at least one hundred thousand hectares" more. Originally from Normandy, a former mayor of a village in Eure, and head of a group that started by producing corn before diversifying into carrots and large-scale field vegetables, François Letierce cleared his first plots in the Landes in 1971 and knows this terroir by heart. In the face of the fires that regularly strike the Landes. In this interview, he discusses the underlying causes of the major fires and advocates for an approach contrary to calls for replacing the pine. According to him, the priority is not to change species, but to rethink forest protection through vast cultivated firebreaks maintained by agriculture.

Bloom Agritech: Why is the Landes forest burning so much?

François Letierce: Its great fragility lies in the monoculture of maritime pine. The latter produces turpentine, which gives the fire an astronomical potential for spread. But the real trigger is found on the ground. In the top two or three meters, we are on dry sand; in a year like this one, the ferns are completely dried out and the molinia is dying. It only takes a shard of glass on a dead fern, and it’s off. And summer is not over: I fear it will burn at least another hundred thousand hectares.

Many of your colleagues, nurserymen, and foresters consider monoculture doomed and advocate for other species. Should we give up on pine?

In principle, more diversity would be better, I do not dispute that. But this massif has a flaw: its sand. Beneath the surface lies a lens of iron oxide, the alios, which is almost impermeable. The pine has the quality that its taproot, once the alios is broken at planting, slips into the cracks and seeks water at four, six, or eight meters deep. An tree needs time to adapt between planting and the moment water becomes accessible, sometimes ten years. The endemic oak, I believe, is doomed, as specialists have told me; the pine, better equipped, evaporates less and suffers less from heat. If someone finds a plant as suited to the sands of the Landes, it should be developed. For now, I do not know of any.

" The pine will remain. If someone finds a plant as suited to the sands of the Landes, it should be developed. For now, I do not know of any"

If the pine is well adapted, what is the problem?

It lies in maintenance, which is the counterpart of exploitation. A well-maintained forest does not burn. I have a concrete example: a man from the forest fire defense, over eighty years old, whose house was in the middle of the forest, right in the heart of the fire. He was found after succumbing to a heart attack, but his house had not burned, even though it had no reason to resist. Simply because he knew what to do: shred the ferns, maintain impeccable undergrowth, clear the base of the pines. All these tasks incur costs. For economic convenience, negligence, or because of not knowing who owns the plots, this forest is not as well maintained as it should be.

" A well-maintained forest does not burn"

Is the fragmentation of property one of the main obstacles? ⭐

It is the decisive factor. The massif is mainly private. Next to properties of two, three, or five thousand hectares coexist a multitude of plots of two or three hectares, owned by private owners whose boundaries cannot be crossed without permission. The result: well-maintained massifs are set ablaze by a small neighboring plot that is poorly maintained. Patient large owners, insurance companies, for example, manage in the long term: they cut about 2.5% of the area per year, and this product finances the maintenance of the whole. Some small owners who do nothing put the entire neighborhood at risk.

" Some small owners who do nothing put the entire neighborhood at risk"

Your solution is firebreaks. But not just any firebreaks.

There are not fifty solutions: we need to create firebreaks. They must be wide enough, from twelve hundred to fifteen hundred meters, otherwise the fire jumps over. Just remember 1949: 52,000 hectares burned, 82 dead. Under the heat, pine cones rose to fifteen hundred meters in altitude, and lateral winds carried them one or two kilometers behind the front. People thought they were safe; the fire would reignite behind them. That’s why we need real breaks, wide, spaced every ten or twenty kilometers along the entire length of the massif.

Why agriculture, precisely, to occupy these breaks?

Because the ideal firebreak is agriculture, and this has been confirmed again this year. A firebreak must be maintained, which represents a considerable cost. If poorly maintained, it is useless. By establishing a profitable crop, it is maintained "for free" by economic activity. Corn is suited to the massif; we have been cultivating it for seventy years: a strip of corn does not burn. Another decisive advantage: we, farmers, are already equipped for irrigation. We know how to bury pipes that run one, five, ten kilometers; since they are buried, they resist fire and would allow water to be brought to the heart of the forest, where firefighters lack it.

" There are not fifty solutions: we need to establish firebreaks. The ideal firebreak is agriculture"

Is this realistic? It assumes that owners will cede land.

A land restructuring is necessary, it’s true. Foresters might give up 10% of their land, but they would gain security for the rest. The farmer is ready to buy this land: that is not the blockage. The blockage is that such a reorganization requires the Region, and especially the public authorities, to show long-term vision. Political courage will be needed to decide where to place these cuts, how wide they should be, and to resolve property issues. But if everyone finds their benefit, the question of "who does what" resolves itself.

"Foresters might give up 10% of their land, but they would gain security"

This year, even agriculture has suffered from the heat. Is this a turning point, or an accident?

Unprecedented. We are experiencing the fourth heatwave, with several days at 41°C, 42°C, 43°C. Western Europe has seen temperatures higher than those in Agadir. Corn has suffered: beyond 38°C, the silks that receive the pollen dry out and die. Some ears, instead of six hundred grains, bore only fifteen or a hundred. This is the first time this has happened to us. Is it repeatable? I don’t know, it will depend on the climate. But one thing is certain: in the Landes, large fires are recurrent. Between 1936 and 1949, more than half of the massif at that time went up in smoke; dry years have always been fire years. The climate accelerates the phenomenon; it did not create it.