Trail hunting consultation guidelines
The Labour government committed to a ban on trail hunting in their manifesto. Ahead of introducing legislation, Defra has launched a public consultation to gauge public opinion on how to implement the ban.
​
After reviewing the questions, we have created a guide on how best to respond to ensure an effective ban. Previous governments have counted similar responses as one, so please edit your answers to avoid this.
Q 1. - Q 6. Questions about confidentiality and you
​
Answer: As is relevant to you
Q 7. Do you agree with the proposed definition of “trail hunting”? For the purposes of the legislation, we propose to use the following definition of “trail hunting.” Trail Hunting is the activity in which a dog is directed to find and follow an animal-based scent which has been laid for that purpose. Animal-based scent means a scent which is derived from a wild mammal, or a scent which mimics, replicates or resembles the scent of a wild mammal (or which is designed to do so), whether or not that scent is derived wholly or in part from artificial ingredients.
​
Answer: No.
-
Defining trail hunting primarily by the type of scent used is incorrect. It must include where and how these scent trails are laid. For example, trail hunting employs the lifting and dropping of a scent drag, or not laying one at all. Both encourage the hounds to find real wildlife scent trails.
-
Laying the scent where mammals are likely to live, such as near woodland, represents a significant risk to wildlife. This definition does not take this into account.
Q 8. What types of conduct should be covered by ‘engagement’ or ‘participation’ in trail hunting?
​
Answer:
To ensure no one evades liability, engagement and participation should include the following roles and their associated activities:
-
Riders, terriermen, falconry, followers (foot, mounted, vehicular), security.
-
Hunt kennels, hunt stables, hunt staff.
-
Company Directors, administrative and governing bodies.
-
Event organisers and co-ordinators, funders, and logistical and online support.
-
Underground hunting (terriermen), exercising hounds, and cub hunting (training young hounds to hunt fox cubs).
Legislation must include a “failure to prevent” clause.
Finally, consider conduct that enables the breaking of the law, such as how and where scent trails are laid.
Q 9. In relation to offences or conduct which would assist unlawful trail hunting to take place, we intend that it should be an offence for the owner or occupier of land to knowingly cause or permit another person to engage or participate in trail hunting on that land. Do you agree?
​
Answer: Yes
-
Landowners should be automatically liable if a hunt chases, harms or kills wildlife while using their land. This would encourage them to be more careful when granting permission, whether for hunts or hound exercise.
-
However, if you want a landowner or occupier to make an informed decision, they should be able to request a standard DBS for the Master of the Foxhounds and all Whipper-Inns against an Animal Offenders Register. This would keep a record of individuals and hunt staff convicted, cautioned, reprimanded or warned of wildlife, and all animal-related offences and allow landowners to reject requests to use their land.
Q 10. In relation to offences or conduct which would assist unlawful trail hunting to take place, we intend that it should be an offence for the owner or person responsible for a dog to knowingly cause or permit another person to use the dog for trail hunting. Do you agree?
​
Answer: Yes
-
The “dog owner” or keeper is committing an offence if they cause or permit another person to knowingly or unknowingly chase, harm or kill a wild mammal with their dog.
-
As “dog owners” are legally responsible for their dog’s behaviour, the “unknowingly” clause ensures they can’t create a loophole allowing them to evade accountability.
Q 11. ​Are there any other forms of conduct which should be considered as possible offences in relation to offences or conduct which would assist unlawful trail hunting to take place?
​
Answer: Yes
-
It should be made illegal for terriermen to attend and participate in hunts. The 2004 Hunting Act makes exceptions for ‘gamekeepers’ and ‘flushing to guns’, and this has allowed for the presence of terriermen at hunts. Terriermen normally attend on quad bikes and carry spades and other equipment traditionally used for fox hunting.
Q 12. Do you consider that any other legislative changes are necessary to ensure that a ban on trail hunting is effective?
​
Answer: Yes
-
Important - Remove the need to prove intent, which is not easy in a court of law, and replace it with a foreseeable risk test.
-
Important - To ensure an effective ban on trail hunting, it is essential to remove all exemptions from the Hunting Act 2004, which provide illegal cover. With the upcoming ban on trail hunting, these exemptions will be exploited further. In short, without removing the exemptions, wildlife crime will continue to proliferate.
-
Important - Make it clear that there has to be proof of predetermined routes and the ability to corroborate that the route has been followed at all times. Eg: Routes published online prior to hunts and front and rear-facing cameras recording hunts and intermittent flag markers. The manipulation of “scent routes” lies at the heart of hunting wildlife crimes.
-
Important - In line with the Hunting Act (Scotland) 2023, summary convictions should include a 12-month imprisonment and a fine not exceeding £40,000. For a conviction on indictment, penalties should be up to five years in prison and/or an unlimited fine.
-
Important - Making trail hunting and other illegal hunting a recordable and notifiable offence will drive accountability, resource allocation and trigger targeted national operations.
-
A definition of hunting should include searching for, locating, pursuing, harassing, or killing mammals with hounds.
-
It should be considered hunting even if the dog is loose, escaped, or not under direct control.
-
There should be a clear definition of all persons responsible for a dog, and that they are legally accountable.
-
It should be an offence to allow lifting and dropping of a scent, not laying a scent and laying a scent in areas where wildlife is likely to inhabit eg: woodlands.
-
It should be an offence for dogs related to a hunt to enter earths, setts, burrows, structures, woodlands or nature reserves where wildlife is likely to be present.
-
Make it an offence to assist, enable, facilitate, or support an illegal hunt.
-
Make it an offence to aid or abet those present or involved in an illegal hunt.
-
Make it an offence to go equipped to a hunt with devices or other items that a reasonable person would consider could be used for hunting.
-
Make it an offence not to report those involved in an illegal hunt.
Q 13. Do you think that it is possible for dogs to be appropriately trained for specific purposes other than trail hunting without the use of either animal-based scents or artificial scents which mimic an animal-based scent?
​
Answer: Yes
-
Dogs can be trained using entirely artificial scents. They do not require a scent to be biologically “natural”. What matters is that the odour is consistent, detectable, and reliably associated with a behavioural outcome or reward.
-
These methods are widely used across sectors such as the police, disaster response, avalanche rescue and even specialised scent detection, such as truffle hunting.
-
To avoid creating loopholes via “training” exemptions, it is essential to remove scent-based training that might allow covert continuation of hunting.
-
To ensure appropriate dog training complies with acceptable standards, there needs to be a regulation that allows oversight and enforcement.
Q 14. Do you think that it should remain lawful, in certain circumstances, for animal-based scents, or scents which mimic animal-based scents, to be used in training dogs for certain purposes?
​
Answer: No
-
All exemptions are exploited to enable the hunting of wildlife, so we don’t advocate creating another loophole. Assuming future hunts abide by the law, a minimum requirement would be to ensure that a scent is not animal-based. Evidence clearly shows that this works for training a dog.
-
Please note that any scent trail makes it easier for hunters to break the law, largely because the trail is invisible. As those leading the hunt cannot see the scent trail or know in advance where it is laid, they can deny responsibility for going off route.
Q 15. Do you agree with the description of drag hunting? We understand that drag hunting is an equestrian sport where an artificial non-animal-based scent trail, which does not mimic an animal-based scent, is laid along a pre-determined route for hounds to follow.
​
Answer:
-
The definition is partially correct. Drag hunting does lay non-animal-based scents and follow a pre-determined route, making it more predictable and controllable.
-
However, it should also state that non-animal-based scents should be freshly laid without lifting and dropping the scent, as this minimises the chances of the dogs straying from the weak scent for another stronger scent of a wild mammal.
-
The definition should also state that there is knowledge of the pre-determined route and that it involves a limited number of hounds that are closely controlled. The more hounds, the greater the chance that they will get out of control.
Q 16. Do you think that there is a risk that dogs engaged in drag hunting will deviate from the pre-laid trail by the scent of a wild mammal and then pursue the wild mammal?
​
Answer: Yes
-
Allowing a pack of hounds to track across the countryside will always represent a significant and foreseeable risk to wildlife, as it is impossible to foresee when wildlife might cross a hunt’s path. But the chances of this happening are high, as the hounds are in the mammal's natural habitat.
-
Dogs have highly sensitive olfactory systems and are naturally inclined to investigate and follow stronger, fresher, or more biologically salient scent cues in their environment. In outdoor settings, once a hound has caught the scent of its prey, they can become uncontrollable, ignoring human commands.
-
The fact that scent trails are invisible creates a risk, as without trail markers, those leading the hunt are more likely to go off route, even if the route is planned.
Q 17. Do you agree that this is an accurate description of ‘clean boot’ hunting? We understand ‘clean boot’ hunting is an activity where hounds hunt human runners who neither wear nor drag any form of artificial scent enhancement.
​
Answer:
-
Not fully, as it should stipulate the use of bloodhounds. Other breeds of dog risk creating new loopholes that could be exploited in the future.
-
While this is considered the safest of alternative hunting styles, it should still be subject to basic legislation. In particular, a “risk foreseeability test” and prohibit bloodhounds from entering areas likely to contain wild mammals, such as setts, earths, burrows or woodland etc.
-
If drag hunting and clean boot hunting are permitted to continue, legislation should prohibit the creation of a new style of hunting. Trail hunting came into existence after hunting mammals with dogs was prohibited, and has acted as a vehicle to break the law.
Q 18. Do you think there is a risk that dogs engaged in clean boot hunting will deviate from their pursuit of human runners to the pursuit of wild mammals?
​
Answer: Yes, there is a risk, but it is greatly reduced.
-
While bloodhounds are exceptional at tracking human scents, the older the scent, the greater the risk will be. The runner can lay the trail anywhere from 1-24 hours before the hunt, meaning that the scent can fade over time, and therefore the hounds could pick up a stronger scent produced by a wild mammal. All runners should lay the trail up to 4 hours before the hunt to ensure that the scent trail is as fresh as possible.
Q 19. ​Do you think that a new law to ban trail hunting would need to include any additional provisions in relation to drag hunting or clean boot hunting?
​
Answer: Yes
-
When law enforcement or legislative pressure is exerted on wildlife criminals, initially, some are likely to try to carry on breaking the law by changing their behaviour. It is only once the pressure exerted on them outweighs the desire to break the law that they will stop.
-
It is likely that those actively breaking the law within the trail hunting community will seek to corrupt future legal hunting alternatives or create new, seemingly legal alternatives when trail hunting is banned.
-
UK wildlife will continue to pay the price, unless all the loopholes are closed and significant pressure is exerted. The simplest and most effective way to ensure this is to ban all forms of hunting with dogs.
-
If drag hunting and clean boot hunting remain, there would need to be stringent controls on the following:
-
All hunting exemptions must be removed.
-
It is important that exercising the hounds is subject to the same hunting laws.
-
There should be NO hunting during the gestation period of commonly impacted mammals.
-
Only hounds with no history of trail hunting should be used in future hunts.
-
Hounds should be trained using non-animal based scents only.
-
Hunts should lay non-animal based scents only.
-
Important - Intermittent visible markers should be laid so the hunt knows they are not going off course.
-
Hounds must be fitted with a tracking device so they can be located during and after a hunt.
-
Hounds must be fitted with a microchip.
-
Hounds involved in chasing/harming/killing any wildlife quarry should be rehomed through a registered pet rehoming charity independent of the hunt.
-
Old or unsuitable hounds should be rehomed through a registered pet rehoming charity independent of the hunt.
-
No hounds should be killed by the hunt staff, only by an independent registered vet.
-
Routes must be pre-planned and published online for everyone to see.
-
Routes must avoid areas where wildlife, livestock and pets would be expected to take shelter. Eg: wooded areas, nature reserves
-
Scent laying should avoid the dropping and dragging of a scent.
-
There should be live streaming and unedited saved footage from front and rear-facing cameras on the Master of the Foxhounds and Whipper-Inns during the hunt.
-
Applications for new hunts should go through an independent government panel consisting of an animal welfare officer, a wildlife crime enforcer and an existing lawful drag hunter.
-
Newly approved drag/clean boot hunts are subject to a five-year probationary period with enhanced inspection requirements.
-
Individuals with unspent or spent convictions under key legislation (including the Hunting Act, Animal Welfare Act 2006, and Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981) should be barred from organising or controlling drag hunts.
-
There should be an Animal Offenders Register, allowing hunts to do a standard DBS check on all future hunt staff and personnel and landowners to do a check on the Master of the Fox Hounds and ALL whipper-inns.
-
Hunt masters and staff should be personally liable for breaking best practice or the law.
-
There should be a national whistleblowing scheme for any future hunts.
-
In line with the Hunting Act (Scotland) 2023, summary convictions should include a 12-month imprisonment and a fine not exceeding £40,000. For a conviction on indictment, penalties should be up to five years in prison and/or an unlimited fine.
-
Making trail hunting and other illegal hunting a recordable and notifiable offence will drive accountability, resource allocation and trigger targeted national operations.
-
Q 20. Are there any equestrian activities other than drag hunting, for example, point to points, which you think are at risk from being affected by the proposed ban on trail hunting?
​
Answer: No, as no other type of equestrian activity involves the use of hounds. It is the hounds that kill the mammals.
Q 21. How do you think the introduction of a ban on trail hunting will affect dogs used for trail hunting? For example, will they be able to be redirected to other activities?
​
Answer:
-
We expect the ban on trail hunting to significantly improve the welfare of hounds. Currently, they are not looked after optimally, with some not being vaccinated and others not receiving veterinary treatment when necessary. Packs of hounds are subject to kennel-related conditions such as kennel sores and kennel cough.
-
Hounds sometimes die in the field and can be left unclaimed, while others injured during hunts are sometimes shot. Hounds considered unsuitable for the hunt or no longer useful are also shot.
-
Pro-hunting groups/individuals often falsely state that hounds would need to be destroyed when trail hunting is banned, as they could not be rehomed. While hunting hounds have been bred for hunting and are kept in kennels, there is strong evidence that hounds adapt well as pets. The founder of Verify Humanity adopted an elderly hunting hound (from Cyprus) with great success.
Q 22. Do you think that there should be a transition period following the introduction of a ban on trail hunting, and if so, how long should that period be?
​
Answer: No
-
The ban on trail hunting should be immediate. There has been a protracted lead-up to this point, providing ample opportunity to make arrangements.
-
All the hunting dogs should be registered immediately to prevent their unjustified killing and to allow animal protection organisations to facilitate their adoption.
Q 23. Do you think that the proposed legislation to ban trail hunting in England and Wales will affect people and/or communities more widely?
​
Answer:
-
Many people and/or communities will be relieved to know that wildlife criminals are no longer able to wreak havoc on the countryside. From the emotional trauma of knowing that hunts might be killing wild animals to the concern for the safety of their loved household pets.
-
It will also protect road users from hounds dangerously spilling onto roads and large quantities of canine defecation, which represent a health risk.
-
Removing trail hunting will also reduce pressure on some landowners who feel obligated to grant access to hunts to use their land.
-
Finally, banning trail hunting would remove the conflict and violence arising from hunts persistently undermining the rule of law. A decisive ban would therefore reduce the burden on the police and justice system. However, a half-hearted response may simply inflame matters.
Q 24. How do you think the proposed ban on trail hunting might affect the income and activities of the hunts currently involved in this activity?
​
Answer:
-
Assuming the ban is thoroughly implemented, we expect to see trail hunts disbanded and fox hounds rehomed. As the legislation is being passed to prevent the ongoing abuse of the law, it will reduce income based on illegal actions and stabilise economic security.
Q 25. How do you think the proposed ban on Trail hunting might affect the income and activities of businesses directly linked with hunts which currently engage in trail hunting?
​
Answer:
-
The ban on trail hunting will have some economic impact, but the scale will be very small. The Countryside Alliance states, “there are 500 direct jobs attached to hunts”, so economic arguments to block the ban are disproportionately overstated.
-
Most businesses have multiple income streams, allowing the impact to be limited. Building diversification will ultimately build economic and social resilience.
Q 26. Do you think that the proposed ban on trail hunting in England and Wales might affect other businesses not directly linked with hunts?
​
Answer: No, if they are not directly linked to hunts, there should be no impact.
Q 27. How do you think that the proposed ban on trail hunting could affect the environment or wildlife?
​
Answer:
-
Wild mammals, like any sentient being, become distressed at the presence of predators, so the proposed ban on trail hunting would reduce the emotional impact on our wildlife. This, in turn, plays into their physical health, resilience against disease and ultimate survival.
-
A comprehensive ban on trail hunting will help support the survival of UK wildlife in a time when biodiversity is in crisis.
-
With regards to the environment, allowing large packs of hounds to race across the UK countryside also creates a vector for diseases such as bovine tuberculosis. Removing this acts as a sensible precautionary approach.
Q 28. Are there any other matters, including possible alternatives to primary legislation, which you feel should be taken into account in developing the legislation to ban trail hunting?
​
Answer: Yes
-
We believe that implementing an Animal Offenders Register, in conjunction with a Standard DBS check, would be particularly effective in preventing hunting crimes. There is a hard-core sector who are not deterred by standard punishments. We believe the risk of losing access to legal hunting alternatives may act as a stronger deterrent in such cases and would provide essential protection to vulnerable wild animals. https://www.verifyhumanity.org/copy-of-animal-offenders-register-aor
-
Animal Offenders Register (AOR) - anyone with a conviction, caution, reprimand, or warning connected to the well-being of an individual animal would go on the Animal Offenders Register.
-
Standard DBS Check - Anyone working with animals, whether employed or self-employed, should have an annual Standard DBS check. If they are on the Animal Offenders Register, they should not be allowed to work with, own or keep animals.
-
The AOR would be an easy system to integrate as it is similar to systems that already exist in the UK (eg: child sex-offenders register and DBS check). Checks would be proportionate and administratively light whilst aiding safeguarding processes and tackling animal crime.
Q 29. Is there any other evidence you would like us to consider?
​
Answer:
-
Alongside the information we have provided here, we would advise the Government to consider the Hunting Act 2004 (Amendment) Bill.