Hounded to Death

I examine the use of the ‘Research and Observation’ exemption under Schedule 1 of the Hunting Act 2004.

Picture provided by North Dorset Hunt Saboteurs

Introduction

The continued pursuit of stags by hounds remains a subject of controversy, particularly when scrutinised through the lens of the Hunting Act 2004 exemptions. Hounded to Death explores the ongoing legal ambiguity that enables stag hunts to persist under the guise of research and observation.¹ Although the Act prohibits hunting wild mammals with dogs, it allows for an exemption for research and observation. This exemption has been widely exploited by stag hunts. This article critically evaluates how the Hunting Act 2004 which was intended to protect wildlife has, in practise, been manipulated to allow traditional stag hunting to continue. By unpacking the complexities of the research and observation exemption, we aim to clarify how the law is being exploited. The analysis incorporates the case of DPP v Wright, which affirms that hunting is considered a continuous act, thereby further shaping and how alleged breaches of the law should be understood.²

The Law

Section one of the Hunting Act 2004 (“HA 2004”) makes it an offence to hunt a wild mammal with a dog, unless the hunting is exempt as stipulated by schedule one of the Act.³ The most commonly used exemption by stag hunts is research and observation. However, the Act provides no detailed definition of what constitutes research and observation, leaving the interpretation and thus its application open to question.

To satisfy this exemption, a hunt must meet all of the following conditions contained within the research and observation exemption. Failure to meet even one condition invalidates the exemption and renders the activity a breach of section one.

1. First Condition: The hunt must be conducted for the purpose of, or in connection with, the observation or study of the wild mammal.

2. Second Condition: No more than two dogs may be used.

3. Third Condition: No dog may be used below ground.

4. Fourth Condition: The hunt must occur on land owned by the hunter or land for which the hunter has received explicit permission from the occupier or owner.

5. Fifth Condition: Each dog must be kept under sufficiently close control to ensure it does not injure the wild mammal.⁴

The first condition is notably vague. The phrase “in connection with the observation or study” does not require the observation to occur during the hunt, in turn allowing for a broad interpretation whereby any hunt loosely associated with the subsequent observation may satisfy this requirement. Furthermore, it could allow hunts to use this exemption if they were gathering such research for a third party who was directly or indirectly connected to the hunt itself. The absence of any statutory guidance on what qualifies as observation or research exacerbates this issue. Moreover, it remains unclear whether legitimate research should arguably align with the standards set in the Animals (Scientific Procedures Act 1986, something that would be expected of those conducting genuine scientific inquiry. It is telling that, to date, only one known research paper has been published by hunts, and there is little to suggest they are academically equipped or inclined to undertake meaningful research.⁵

Concerning the second condition, while evidence of hunts using more than two dogs is limited, Hunt Saboteurs and Monitors have reported seeing hunts operating hounds in “relay”, a tactic in which additional dogs are deployed in succession. Whilst making sure that only two dogs at a time are pursuing the stag. Although the Act does not address this strategy, its omission is likely because the concept of relaying hounds is a creation of the hunts themselves. For instance, on 18 April 2025 North Dorset Hunt Saboteurs used drone footage to document more than two hounds present at the Quantock Stag Hounds meet.⁶

Although there is no evidence to suggest more than two hounds were used at once during the hunt, this does strongly suggest that hunts continue to deploy hounds in excess of the legal limit but in relay form. Similarly, in a 2018 incident, seven to eight hounds were allegedly used by the Quantock Staghounds to chase a deer across the moor.⁷ Although their Ex-chairman, Nick Gibbon claimed that any use of more than two hounds would be for “trail hunting”, such statements are questionable and demand scrutiny, especially given the lack of evidence of trail laying.

The third condition, which prohibits the use of dogs underground, is not considered in this analysis due to its limited relevance in the context of stag hunting.

The Fourth condition is more straightforward but equally problematic in practice. It requires the hunt to occur on land they own or on which they have explicit permission.⁸

Yet alleged breaches of this condition have been documented. For example, on 22 April 2025, Hunt Saboteurs and independent Hunt monitors recorded the Quantock Staghounds trespassing on Forestry England land during the pursuit of a stag.⁹ Despite individuals informing Forestry England’s office about the trespass, no immediate action was taken.

Regarding the fifth condition, which requires hounds to be kept under sufficiently close control to prevent injury to the wild mammal, questions remain about enforcement.¹⁰ Hunts often claim their hounds are always under control; however, visual evidence frequently shows hounds far ahead of the hunt, raising doubts about whether they could be recalled if necessary. During a recent Quantock hunt, Mendip Hunt Sabs observed an out-of-control hound on Forestry England land.¹¹ The term “sufficiently close control” could be interpreted to mean that the huntsman must maintain visual contact with the dogs and be able to intervene as needed.

Furthermore, followers and riders are often used as a pack of hounds themselves to drive the stag in certain directions. Quad bikes are sometimes used to stop the stag from entering private land or have been known to be used to drive the stag itself. During the Devon and Somerset Staghounds’ opening meet on 31 August 2024, footage shows a stag being driven not only by riders but also by a quad. Later in the footage, another stag is seen being driven by a car.¹²

Using vehicles to drive stags is illegal under the Deer Act 1991 unless the hunt has written authority of the occupier of any enclosed land where deer are usually kept, and in relation to any deer on that land.¹³

Footage above - Dorset Hunt Sabs

Section 4(b) states:

(4) Subject to subsection (5) below, if any person

(a) discharges any firearm, or projects any missile, from any mechanically propelled vehicle at any deer, [when the vehicle is moving or when its engine is running,] or

(b) uses any mechanically propelled vehicle for the purpose of driving deer,
he shall be guilty of an offence.

However, if the hunt has written authority of the occupier of any enclosed land where deer are usually kept, and in relation to any deer on that land, then this would not constitute an offence.

Subsection (5) provides:

(5) An act which, apart from this subsection, would constitute an offence under subsection (4) above shall not constitute such an offence if it is done

(a) by, or with the written authority of, the occupier of any enclosed land where deer are usually kept; and

(b) in relation to any deer on that land.

Written authority is not required if the intention is not to kill the deer.

In terms of enclosed land, this could be land in which deer are managed and not wild terrain. If the hunt is on open countryside, for example Exmoor, or any area where deer are wild, this exemption does not apply even with permission.

---

The Quantock Staghounds and Forestry England

Date: 22 April 2025

Meet: Bagborough House

On 22 April 2025, the Quantock Staghounds were observed hunting a stag on Forestry England land near the area of Ramscombe.¹⁴ Initially concealed in a gorse, the stag was flushed and began fleeing across National Trust land before re-entering Forestry England land. Saboteurs and Monitors reported the incident to Forestry England in person. Despite this, the hunt continued, with supporters and riders assembling at Aisholt Common to intercept the stag. The hounds were heard moving through Parsons Plantation and the Slades. Ultimately, the stag fled onto open farmland near Lydeard Hill, where, exhausted after a three-hour chase, it collapsed and was killed. A map of some of the area that was used for the hunt shows the proximity of the Forestry England office to the site of the chase.¹⁵

Picture Provided by North Dorset Hunt Saboteurs

Further Footage shows the Hunt within Forestry England land.

Footage provided by Wildlife Crime Action

What does the Law say?

It is likely that the hunt would attempt to rely on the “research and observation” exemption set out in Schedule 1 (9) of the HA 2004. However, to do so legally, all five conditions under schedule 1 for this specific exemption of the HA 2004 must be met.¹⁶ The most easily challenged condition is the fourth, as there is clear evidence that the hunt entered land without permission.

The relevant clause, Section 9(5) of the Act, specifies that land must either belong to the hunter or be used with permission from the occupier or owner. As forestry England has made clear, no such permissions are granted.¹⁷

As with all exemptions under Schedule 1 of the HA 2004, the Act makes it clear that every single condition pertaining to the specific exemption being relied on must be met in full for the exemption to apply. The Act does not allow for a partial or proportional application of the exemptions nor the conditions. Thus, where condition four is not satisfied the exemption under Schedule 1 cannot be relied upon. The failure to meet even one single condition renders the hunt unlawful in its entirety, regardless of whether the other four conditions were in fact fulfilled.

Therefore, in any situation where the hunt proceeds onto land without permission such as Forestry England or National Trust it cannot rely on the "research and observation" exemption. The Act of trespass, however momentary or incidental, fundamentally disqualifies the hunt from such exemptions.

In terms of the stag being hunted on and off Forestry England land we can use the case of DPP v Wright to show that ‘Hunting’ is a continuous event. The Court addressed the interpretation of “hunting” under the HA 2004, the court clarified that “hunting” involves the pursuit of a specified, identified wild mammal, rather than the mere act of searching for one. This distinction is very crucial when it comes to determining when the Act of hunting legally commences.¹⁸

The Judgment does not explicitly state that hunting is a continuous activity, but it implies that once the pursuit of an identified wild mammal begins, the activity constitutes hunting. Therefore, in the case of the Quantocks it does not matter that they pursued the stag on and off Forestry England land. If a hunt starts on land that either belongs to them or that they have permission to use and continues onto land without such permissions or ownership the entire sequence may be considered as a single, continuous act of hunting. Strengthening this point is the fact that the stag would have been chosen and as a result pursued and continually hunted until killed.

The current Chairman of the Quantock Staghounds was asked for comment in an article by the West Somerset FreePress about the recent incident on Forestry England land. James Hawthorne said, “The forest is full of bridleways which are used by riders every day of the week.¹⁹

It is not clear what he means by this in the context of hunt trespass. Bridleways do not allow for a Carte Blanche for hunting. The Chairmans claim that the forest is full of bridleways is irrelevant, more so as he does not state that the hunt was using such bridleways at the time of the hunt. Bridleways, under the Highways Act 1980, provides public access for riding horses, walking and cycling but this does not grant permission to conduct a hunt.²⁰

As per DPP v Wright the court clarified that “hunting” involves the pursuit of a specified, identified wild mammal, rather than the mere act of searching for one. This means that as soon as the stag was identified, and the pursuit began the activity falls within the definition of “hunting” under the Hunting Act 2004. The use of bridleways during the hunt does not break that chain of events.

Forestry England’s Response

Forestry England acknowledged the incident and confirmed that their ranger had observed the Quantock Staghounds on Forestry England land and on the highway. This was evidenced in an email provided to me by a Hunt Saboteur who had asked for clarification from Forestry England as to what they intend to do in relation to this event. I have provided the email below.

Good afternoon,

Thank you for contacting Forestry England. As the team responsible for managing this woodland, we are responding to all correspondence regarding the reported stag hunting activity on 22nd April at Ramscombe.

The Hunting Act 2004 banned hunting with dogs (including stag hunting) in England. Trail hunting (which is the artificial laying of a laying of a scent for dogs to follow) is a legal activity. Forestry England has not issued permissions for legal trail hunting on the nation’s forests since 2021. We condemn illegal activity on the land we manage.

Our staff were made aware of an incident near Ramscombe on 22nd April. A ranger attended and observed the Quantock Staghounds, together with vehicles and followers, on the highway and on Forestry England land. No illegal activity or kill was witnessed. The incident has been logged, and we will be notifying the police and contacting the hunt accordingly.

Where incidents are witnessed by our staff we report the matter to the police. Forestry England does not have legal powers to investigate or intervene in alleged criminal activity. We also do not proactively monitor social media for evidence, and we are unable to physically prevent incursions, particularly where doing so could place our staff in unsafe situations.

If you have evidence of illegal activity occurring on land managed by Forestry England we strongly request that you notify the police, providing them with the evidence, so they can undertake further investigations.

More information about our approach to trail hunting can be found here: Forestry England Trail Hunting Policy.

If you wish to make your views known regarding hunting legislation, you may wish to contact your local MP. We understand that the future of trail hunting will be subject to a public consultation later this year.

We recognise that many people contacting us are doing so out of concern for animal welfare and with the best of intentions. Please be assured that we take all reports very seriously and act within the limits of our powers and responsibilities.

Due to the high volume of correspondence received on this matter, we are unable to enter into further communication, but we would like to thank you again for taking the time to share your concerns with us.

Forestry England stated that “no illegal activity or kill was witnessed”. This conclusion overlooks the legal requirement for any hunting on Forestry England land without explicit permission could breach the HA 2004. Their failure to recognise this not only undermines their own statement but also indicates a fundamental misinterpretation of the law.

Forestry England does not claim to monitor or enforce hunting legislation actively and rightly noted the safety concerns around confronting hunts directly. Nonetheless, their hunting policy only addresses trail hunting a practice evidenced to be a smoke screen for illegal hunting and a practice not claimed by stag hunts which leaves a critical gap in policy regarding stag hunting trespass.

Further examples of Stag Hunting

Another incident this time involving the Devon and Somerset Staghounds further illustrates the systemic issues with the enforcement and interpretation of the Hunting Act 2004. During a hunt on the Exmoor, the stag was pursued for approximately two hours before being shot and killed. According to an account from North Dorest Hunt Saboteurs, the exhausted stag crashed into a fence while fleeing from the hounds, later collapsing on Twitchen Ridge before being killed near Leworthy.²¹

As with other hunts seeking to justify their action under the “research and observation” exemption, this hunt would have to had to satisfy every single one of the five conditions under Schedule 1(9) for the exemption to apply. However, the conduct observed raises serious concerns about adherence. Additionally, no credible evidence has been presented to show that the hunt was genuinely conducted for research and observation purposes. The highly emotive and confrontational scene described by witnesses where a gunman allegedly brandished his weapon to block saboteurs attempting to protect the stag also undermines any notion that this was a controlled activity carried out for scientific or observational ends. Once again, if even one of the five conditions was not met, the exemption cannot apply, rendering the entire hunt a likely breach of Section 1 of the Act.

Footage of the events are linked below.

Click here for Footage

Another incident occurred on 6 April 2023, when Dorset Hunt Saboteurs recorded footage of a hunt taking place. During the event, a stag was observed being separated from the herd and hiding before being flushed out by riders. The stag subsequently managed to re-join another group of stags. North Dorset Hunt Saboteurs later reported hearing a gunshot ring out to the northwest of Lady’s Edge. Upon approaching the direction of the shot, a saboteur discovered the body of the dead stag. The animal was then loaded onto a quad bike and removed from the scene.

No police action was taken in the two above examples.

Footage provided by North Dorset Hunt Saboteurs

Conclusion

The continued practice of stag hunting under the guise of lawful hunting, aided by the exploitation of the "research and observation" exemption in the Hunting Act 2004, reveals significant flaws in the legislation's ability to protect wildlife. While the Act was designed to prohibit hunting wild mammals with dogs, the vague and loosely defined criteria for the exemption allows hunts to persist. The case of the Quantock Staghounds illustrates how hunts can exploit legal loopholes, such as the questionable interpretation of "research and observation".

The breaches of the fourth condition, particularly the documented trespassing on Forestry England land, are the most straightforward breaches and highlight how the exemption cannot be relied upon if even one condition is breached. The Hunting Act 2004 is clear in that a single breach renders the entire hunt unlawful.

Forestry England’s failure to adequately address these breaches relying instead on weak statements and insufficient enforcement further underscores the need for clearer legal protections and more robust monitoring and accountability. Their policy, which only addresses "trail hunting," fails to account for the realities of stag hunting and its potential for abuse. This legal uncertainty, coupled with inadequate enforcement allows for the continuation of alleged illegal hunting under the guise of lawful hunting.

Ultimately, the case of the Quantock Staghounds and other similar instances highlight the urgent need for reform. The government must ensure that the protections intended by the Hunting Act 2004 are not undermined by loopholes and misinterpretations, and that wildlife is genuinely safeguarded from the ongoing exploitation of the law. Only by removing all exemptions, clearer legal definitions, and better enforcement can wildlife be protected.

References

Table of Legislation

• Highways Act 1980, s 329

• Hunting Act 2004, s 1

• Hunting Act 2004, sch 1, para 9

• Hunting Act 2004, sch 1, para 9 (1)

• Hunting Act 2004, sch 1, para 9 (2)

• Hunting Act 2004, sch 1, para 9 (3)

• Hunting Act 2004, sch 1, para 9 (4)

• Hunting Act 2004, sch 1, para 9(5)

• Hunting Act 2004, sch 1, para 9 (6)

Table of Cases

• DPP (Crown Prosecution Service CCU South West) v Anthony Wright; and The Queen on the Application of Maurice Scott, Peter Heard & Donald Summersgill v Taunton Deane Magistrates Court [2009] EWHC 105 (Admin)

Books and Journal Articles

• Keith J Collard, ‘A Study of the Incidence of Bovine Tuberculosis in the Wild Red Deer Herd of Exmoor’ (2023) 69 European Journal of Wildlife Research

Newspaper Articles

• James Tapper, ‘Police Probe Claim of Illegal Hunting by Quantock Staghounds’ (The Guardian, 25 March 2018) https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/25/police-probe-illegal-hunting-claim-quantock-staghounds accessed 30 April 2025

• John Thorne, ‘Forestry England Pressed to Act against Quantock Staghounds after Claims by Sabs’ (West Somerset Free Press, 29 April 2025) https://www.wsfp.co.uk/news/forestry-england-pressed-to-act-against-quantock-staghounds-after-claims-by-sabs-788466 accessed 30 April 2025

Websites and Social Media Posts

• Mendip Hunt Saboteurs (Facebook, 23 April 2025) https://www.facebook.com/share/p/16Z7VLfLbx/?mibextid=wwXIfr accessed 29 April 2025

• North Dorset Hunt Saboteurs (Facebook, 28 April 2025) https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1AkPxpFMij/?mibextid=wwXIfr accessed 29 April 2025

• North Dorset Hunt Saboteurs (Facebook, 28 April 2025) https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1118761620289661&id=100064675003479&mibextid=wwXIfr&rdid=Dj5lOzxsBSFEQfsD# accessed 29 April 2025

• Wildlife Guardian (Facebook, 26 April 2025) https://www.facebook.com/thewildlifeguardian/videos/hunt-stoops-to-new-lows-hunting-and-killing-a-young-male-pricket-at-the-seasons-/1379192563119876/?mibextid=wwXIfr&rdid=7JACDTKbVH1im4oD accessed 27 April 2025

· Hunt Saboteurs Association, ‘Stag Hunting: A Marathon of Cruelty - Hunt Saboteurs Association’ (Hunt Saboteurs Association23 April 2024) <https://www.huntsabs.org.uk/stag-hunting-a-marathon-of-cruelty/> accessed 30 April 2025

Credits

North Dorset Hunt Saboteurs

Wildlife Crime Action

1. Hunting Act 2004, sch 1, para 9

2. DPP (Crown Prosecution Service CCU South West) v Anthony Wright; and The Queen on the Application of Maurice Scott, Peter Heard & Donald Summersgill v Taunton Deane Magistrates Court [2009] EWHC 105 (Admin).

3. Hunting Act 2004, S1

4. Hunting Act 2004, sch 1, para 9

5. Keith J Collard, ‘A Study of the Incidence of Bovine Tuberculosis in the Wild Red Deer Herd of Exmoor’ (2023) 69 European Journal of Wildlife Research.

6. North Dorset Hunt Saboteurs (Facebook, 28 April 2025) <https://www.facebook.com/share/v/1AkPxpFMij/?mibextid=wwXIfr> accessed 29 April 2025

7. James Tapper, ‘Police Probe Claim of Illegal Hunting by Quantock Staghounds’ (the Guardian25 March 2018) <https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2018/mar/25/police-probe-illegal-hunting-claim-quantock-staghounds> accessed 30 April 2025.

8. Hunting Act 2004, Sch 1 Para 9

9. North Dorset Hunt Saboteurs (Facebook, 28 April 2025) < <https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1118761620289661&id=100064675003479&mibextid=wwXIfr&rdid=Dj5lOzxsBSFEQfsD#> accessed 29 April 2025

10. Hunting Act 2004, Sch 1 Para 9

11. Mendip Hunt Saboteurs (Facebook 23 April 2025) < https://www.facebook.com/share/p/16Z7VLfLbx/?mibextid=wwXIfr> accessed 29 April 2025

12. North Dorset Hunt Saboteurs (Twitter, 31 August 2024)

13. Deer Act 1991 S 4(b) and S 5 (a)(b)

14. Wildlife Guardian (Facebook 26 April 2025 < https://www.facebook.com/thewildlifeguardian/videos/hunt-stoops-to-new-lows-hunting-and-killing-a-young-male-pricket-at-the-seasons-/1379192563119876/?mibextid=wwXIfr&rdid=7JACDTKbVH1im4oD> accessed 27 April 2025

15. North Dorset Hunt Saboteurs (Facebook, 28 April 2025) < <https://www.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=1118761620289661&id=100064675003479&mibextid=wwXIfr&rdid=Dj5lOzxsBSFEQfsD#> accessed 29 April 2025

16. Hunting Act 2004, Sch 1 Para 9

17. Hunting Act 2004, Sch 1 Para 9(5)

18. DPP (Crown Prosecution Service CCU South West) v Anthony Wright; and The Queen on the Application of Maurice Scott, Peter Heard & Donald Summersgill v Taunton Deane Magistrates Court [2009] EWHC 105 (Admin).

19. John Thorne, ‘Forestry England Pressed to Act against Quantock Staghounds after Claims by Sabs’ (West Somerset Free Press29 April 2025) <https://www.wsfp.co.uk/news/forestry-england-pressed-to-act-against-quantock-staghounds-after-claims-by-sabs-788466> accessed 30 April 2025.

20. Highways Act 1980 S 329

21. Hunt Saboteurs Association , ‘Stag Hunting: A Marathon of Cruelty - Hunt Saboteurs Association’ (Hunt Saboteurs Association23 April 2024) <https://www.huntsabs.org.uk/stag-hunting-a-marathon-of-cruelty/> accessed 30 April 2025.