Pine Trees: Nature’s Own Matchbox Unveiled

From January 1 to July 22, 2026, nearly 43,000 hectares have been consumed by fire in mainland France, as reported by the European Forest Fire Information System (Effis). Sylvain Angerand, a forestry engineer and the director of the Canopée association which is committed to forest conservation, insists on incorporating fire risk into our forest management and development strategies.

Decatur Metro — What is the current issue with the French forests burning, particularly the Landes forest?

Sylvain Angerand — Our forest ecosystems are struggling due to climate change. This year, we’ve experienced very early heatwaves that are happening one after another. The conditions are ripe for large-scale fires to ignite. In a drought situation like this, once a fire starts, regardless of the forest type, it spreads rapidly.

The fires in Gironde have reached such a magnitude partly because we have created a forest massif that is highly susceptible to fires. Originally, this area mainly consisted of heathlands and open, often wet environments [marshes and swamps], interspersed with wooded areas. Maritime pine was already present in some places, but it was mixed with deciduous trees like the English oak, the Pyrenean oak, the cork oak, and the holm oak, as well as alders, birches, and willows in the wetter areas. Starting in the 19th century, particularly after the imperial law of 1857 under Napoleon III, much of this land was drained and sanitized then transformed into maritime pine plantations.

Today, it is one of the largest forestry areas in Europe, predominantly composed of maritime pines, which a significant part of the wood industry relies on. Unfortunately, intensive forestry and the monoculture plantations of coniferous trees in plains are exacerbating factors for fires. As a result, this plantation forest is highly artificial and extremely vulnerable to fires.

It’s often said that it would be impossible to plant anything else in the Landes. Is that really true?

It’s not feasible to plant deciduous trees everywhere in the Landes de Gascogne forest because the soils are often sandy. However, it’s still possible to make this territory less vulnerable to fires. About 20% of the area could be introduced with deciduous trees that are suitable for these soils. These species were already present in the Landes: Pyrenean oak, cork oak, English oak in some areas, and even pubescent oak. Thus, it is possible to diversify this massif with a mix of species. In the most favorable areas, especially to enhance ecological connectivity, we could even achieve 40%, or even 60%, deciduous trees.

Why does Emmanuel Macron’s policy on forest management contradict the requirements of forests adapted to new climatic conditions?

By setting a goal to plant one billion trees to renew the French forest, rather than aiming to restore forest areas and enhance their ecological robustness, Emmanuel Macron has approached the problem from the wrong angle. In terms of forest cycles, the French forest is relatively young. The older a forest gets, within certain limits, the more functional and robust its ecosystem becomes.

For instance, regarding fire risk, older pines and cork oaks develop thicker bark over time, which helps them resist fire better compared to younger trees. Large deadwood also plays a crucial role as it decomposes, retains water, and contributes to soil functionality. Allowing the forest to age also means it can store more carbon in the trees and the ground.

Conversely, rejuvenating it with extensive clear-cutting and new plantations can reduce this carbon storage, accelerate climate disruptions, and make adaptation much more difficult, if not impossible. It’s a risky gamble, and one doesn’t need to wait until 2100 to see its effects: young plants are already dying en masse in the direct sun.

On the other hand, enhancing the robustness of ecosystems by allowing trees to age and gradually diversifying the populations through selective logging, without ever destroying the forest cover, helps mitigate climate change, adapt to it, and continue wood production.

In 2022, after the devastating fires in Gironde, Emmanuel Macron rushed in front of the cameras and promised to rebuild this forest as part of his plan. The result: the area was replanted identically, with maritime pines and public money. I can only describe it as a ‘scandal’. But the scandal doesn’t stop there. As our forests suffer, the government has set a goal to increase wood harvesting as part of its new Low-Carbon National Strategy.

In the Southwest, the government is freely granting permissions for industrial projects. For instance, the state recognized the bi
fuel plant project [the E-cho project] on July 7 as a ‘major national interest project’, even though this plant plans to source some of its wood from the Landes massif.

This massif is already very fragile, and the burned wood will no longer be available for the industry. This will inevitably add new tensions to those already existing due to past storms and fires.

Instead, we should be reducing the pressure on this massif, revising industrial projects, and adapting withdrawals to the real capacity of ecosystems.

In managing fires, what could have been done differently?

It’s clear that France has fallen massively behind on this issue. We know that we will increasingly face challenges like extreme fires, with a geographical expansion of the risk. Yet, the resources allocated to fire prevention and fighting remain woefully inadequate. This is concerning.

The capabilities of the fire-fighting services are already nearly at capacity. The system of volunteer firefighters, who are poorly compensated and depend on their employers’ goodwill to be mobilized, is reaching its limits. The equipment is aging: the last Canadair was put into service in 2007, and for maintenance reasons, several aircraft are regularly out of service.

Even the European solidarity mechanism, which is an excellent idea, remains largely under-equipped given the scale of these fires. This moment is revealing our lack of foresight. We can no longer afford to be reactive when a fire breaks out: we need to change our approach and invest massively in prevention.

Once the flames are extinguished, what urgent task will need to be tackled?

The first thing to do is to wait and observe what will naturally happen. It makes no sense to rush to plant. If natural regeneration occurs, it’s a good thing: it will allow us to spend less public money, but it will need to be supported.

We will need to reintroduce deciduous trees where they have disappeared, recreate wetlands, and end drainage. We will also need to ensure that exotic species, like the black locust, do not take over. This is what we call ecological engineering. Today, forest management must be integrated into actual land planning to identify or create firebreaks, rethink interfaces with agriculture and pastoralism, and also review how we inhabit these territories. We have built too much and too often too close to forests.

Legal obligations are necessary, but their implementation has become a real headache. To enforce them while ensuring not to destroy biodiversity, we advocate for the creation of a real public service for support and control. Forest management also needs to evolve. Choices are currently made at the level of each property, but they must tomorrow be thought out at the massif scale, in consultation with local elected officials, associations, and scientists.

We need to move from a logic of a ‘renewal plan’, where trees are counted in an Excel spreadsheet before being planted in a standardized manner, to a true ‘plan for ecosystem restoration and habitability of territories’. Public authorities are not sufficiently equipped to manage this complexity. Yet, this is where the key to mitigating climate change and attempting to adapt lies.