COUNTRYSIDE ALLIANCE

ISSUES SURROUNDING A CLOSE SEASON FOR THE BROWN HARE
(Lepus Europaeus)

BACKGROUND

There have been calls to grant the brown hare a close season for a number of years. Close seasons already exist in some European countries and Scotland has recently introduced a close season under the Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Act 2011, which prohibits the intentional or reckless killing, injuring or taking of brown hares between 1 February and 30 September. It is, however, far from clear on what evidential basis a close season was introduced and why those particular dates were chosen.

Following the change in the law in Scotland there have been increasing calls for the rest of the UK to follow suit.

Early Day Motion 15 tabled in May 2012 by Adrian Sanders (2012/2013 session) states:

“That this House deplores the shooting of hares throughout their breeding season as cruel and unnecessary; notes that in Scotland the brown hare and mountain hare now have close seasons to protect nursing mothers and their dependent young; and calls on the Government to confer similar protection on these icons of the British countryside.”

Some groups have claimed that the brown hare is in decline and the argument that certain animals, especially one that is included in the UK’s Biodiversity Action Plan, should be protected during their breeding season appears very strong. The reality is more complex and there is an absence of evidence which would support a close season.

The one question that must be answered is “Would a close season benefit the brown hare?”

Legal Status of the Brown Hare

The current status of the brown hare falls into various categories, in that it is a Biodiversity Action Plan (BAP) species, a pest species and a quarry species. The brown hare’s inclusion in BAP in the 1990s was not because the animal was rare or endangered, but because of its decline over many years there was a desire to increase numbers.

Its current legal status is covered by:

• Game Act 1831, which animals are regarded as ‘game’, the hare being one such animal.
• Ground Game Act 1880, as amended, gives landowners and occupiers the right to kill hares. However, in England and Wales occupiers or authorised persons may only take and kill ground game on moorland or unenclosed land between 1 September and 31 March inclusive, however, firearms may only be used for such purposes between 11 December and 31 March.
• Hares Preservation Act 1892, which makes it illegal to sell or advertise the sale of hares between 1st March and 31st July. (This does not apply to hares that are imported.)
• Prevention of Damage by Rabbits Act 1939, which prohibits the use of spring traps on hares.
• Agriculture Act 1947, which refers to the prevention of damage by pests, including hares.
• Pests Act 1954, which refers to the open trapping of hares with spring traps.
• Forestry Act 1967, which refers the prevention of damage to trees by hares.
• Convention on the Conservation of European Wildlife and Natural Habitats (Berne Convention), which covers the conservation of wild flora and fauna and their natural habitats, the hare being listed.

The brown hare is also covered by legislation that refers to UK mammals:

• Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981
• Wild Mammal Protection Act 1996
• Hunting Act 2004
• Animal Welfare Act 2006

Current Numbers

The first argument made in favour of a close season is based on an assertion of a decline in hare numbers. While there has been a decline overall over many decades this is not related to the absence of a close season, current populations are stable although hare populations vary across the country. The primary cause of decline is changes in farming practice rather than the absence of a season.

• The brown hare has declined dramatically since the 1800s, from an estimated 4 million to 750,000-800,000 at the present time.
• The Ground Game Act 1880 gave the right to tenant farmers to take hares and this had a severe impact on hare numbers.
• Populations are not evenly distributed in England, with fewer in areas in the West and levels reaching pest proportions in some areas in the East.
• The most recent survey of the brown hare population was undertaken in 1995 for the Joint Nature Conservation Committee (JNCC) and suggests that numbers are relatively stable, though the report does add that the general picture throughout the country is unclear. (1)
• The figures of 750,000 – 800,000 have been quoted for the last few decades and the People’s Trust for Endangered Species in 2011 found that numbers are increasing, due in part to set-aside schemes.
• This is in contrast to many European countries (such as Austria, Belgium, Denmark, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Luxembourg, Netherlands, Poland, Portugal, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland), which have introduced close seasons and yet still see hare numbers continue to decline. (2)

Pressures

• Farming has changed significantly since the 1800s, with mechanisation, use of pesticides, greater turn-over of crops and loss of smaller sized fields (attractive to hares) contributing to decline of the hare. (3)
• Poaching has also had a severe effect on hare numbers, both in terms of the actual numbers killed by gangs of poachers and the fact that many landowners and farmers will kill hares in order to remove the target from such gangs, which are often involved in other criminal activity, including violence, when trespassing.
• Predators also play a part in keeping hare numbers down. Traditionally, gamekeepers remove foxes that predate on leverets, but with the reduction in the number of gamekeepers over decades this situation too has changed. High numbers of foxes on any farm will limit hare numbers. Various studies undertaken by the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust have shown that predator control and the lack of predator control have a direct bearing on hare populations. (4) & (5)

Reproduction

• Pregnant does have been found in all months although most breeding takes place between January to August/September, although March to September is the period when most successful breeding takes place and survival rates are highest.
• Bucks are known to be fertile in all months other than October and November.
• Does are receptive for just a few hours on one day during their 6 weekly cycles.
• Does can have up to four litters per year, producing between 1 and 4 leverets each birth. Much depends on weather conditions.
• The main mating period is March/April and going on through to July.
• Gestation period is 43 days
• Leverets are weaned at 30 days

ARGUMENTS EMPLOYED FOR A CLOSE SEASON

• The case for a close season for the brown hare would appear to be based on certain assumptions, partly relating to conservation arguments and partly relating to animal welfare arguments.
• In Scotland the move seems to have been prompted by a clash of views as to how the hare, and wildlife generally, is seen, i.e. a commodity to be used, or a wild species to be protected. (6)
• It might be argued that the answer lies in the management of wildlife. Management differs from pest control because it seeks to maintain healthy and balanced populations of wild mammals at levels which can be sustained by their local environment, and which are acceptable to farmers, landowners and the overall balance of all other indigenous wildlife. On the other hand, pest control often aims to reduce or even eradicate populations.

Conservation

• If conservation is the main concern, it would be wrong simply to accept the ‘decline in numbers’ argument. As stated above, while it is accepted that numbers are now lower than in the 1800s and uneven in distribution across England and Wales, brown hare populations are at the very least stable, if not increasing. (7)
• Increasing numbers would appear to be supported by first-hand observation by hunts from the mid-1980s to 2004/5. (8)
• Although population levels have not reached government targets, the trend appears to be upward. It is reasonable, therefore, to assume that conservation efforts are having a degree of success (9). This also supports the view that the absence of a close season is unrelated to the historic decline in numbers and is therefore not the answer to increasing numbers.
• While sounding reasonable in relation to a non-shooting period during the breeding season, what is not mentioned in the EDM above is the fact that hares have been known to breed virtually all year round. Would landowners and farmers in certain areas tolerate an extensive close season?
• Presumably a close season would not benefit the hare in areas where they are few or non-existent.
• A close season would have absolutely no effect on poaching activities.
• Falconers sometimes take hares as well as rabbits, hunting the latter sometimes into the summer months. How might a close season affect falconry, given that a bird of prey once released will not distinguish between a hare and a rabbit?
• The start of the breeding season is triggered by the increase in daylight hours. However, excessively wet conditions threaten breeding success. There is a real possibility that climate change may have an effect on the hare population, making breeding success uncertain. This complicates the situation as far as a fixed close season is concerned.
• Practical steps should be taken to increase the hare population, as described by the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust (G&WCT) in their advice to farmers and landowners (10). On the Loddington Estate in Leicestershire, which is owned by the G&WCT, hare numbers rose dramatically following changes in land management methods. Similar experiments undertaken by the G&WCT on Salisbury Plain in Wiltshire and Royston in Hertfordshire found similar results, as stated above.

Welfare

• The killing of nursing hares means that leverets will inevitably die, which does raise a welfare issue. However, research undertaken in the 1970s indicates that of the first litter each year, many leverets are weak and die prematurely. It is therefore questionable whether a close season would prevent the suffering of many leverets of the first litter each year or be significant in boosting hare numbers. (11)
• Any close season would have to allow exceptions to permit actions to prevent serious damage to crops, etc. This is the case in the Scottish Wildlife and Natural Environment (Scotland) Act, which again raises questions about whether a close season would be effective. (12)
• If the argument for a close season is partly based on opposition to hares being shot, then it is misplaced as shooting will still occur in the period outside a close season. Indeed, there is a real concern that there could be a ‘pre-emptive strike’ by farmers and landowners before a close season starts, a worry expressed by the Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust.
• Concerns have also been raised with regard to harvesting times and ordinary agricultural practice.
• A close season on the grounds of welfare is therefore also open to question. (13)

Political views

• The issue of a close season for the brown hare was raised in Parliament in 2007 under the Labour government, and advice given at the time to DEFRA by the Brown Hare Species Action Plan Steering Group was that a close season was not recommended.(14)
• Since that time, the steering groups for a number of species, including the brown hare, have ceased to exist, but there is no new evidence which would support a change of position by the Government.
• A close season was again raised in Parliament in June 2012. The minister stated that information indicated that the brown hare population was stable, although there were regional variations.(15)

CONCLUSION

There is no firm evidential basid for a close season in England and Wales. In both conservation and welfare terms it is doubtful whether a close season would achieve the desired improvements in either case. The likely impact of climate change further complicates the situation.

REFERENCES

(1) The current status of the brown hare (Lepus europaeus) in Britain
(1996) Hutchings, M.R. and Harris, S. School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol

(2) “Furthermore, any impact of a close season would probably be particularly limited in areas, such as western England, where organised hunting has already declined in response to reduced hare numbers. It is also clear that declines in hare abundance have occurred elsewhere in Europe, despite the putatively greater protection afforded by close seasons on hunting.”
An overview of the current status and protection of the Brown Hare
(Lepus europaeus) in the UK
A report prepared for European Wildlife Division, Defra by Dr David Cowan, Central Science Laboratory, August 2004

(3) “All the evidence suggests that the main factors leading to the decline in hare numbers were changes in the pattern of landscape management. These were associated with the intensification in farming practices that led to the east/west arable/pastoral divide in Britain. Hare numbers in arable areas declined with the reduction in habitat richness associated with the loss of the rotational pattern of farming; the change to large fields with less crop diversity between fields was likely to be a major factor in this decline. The use of chemical sprays, coupled with the use of spraying machines with larger booms, has led to dramatic local declines in hare numbers, although some farmers reported that these were reversed by the use of less toxic sprays. The final factor contributing to the decline in arable areas appears to have been the change from spring-sown to winter-sown cereals, thereby leading to a shortage of suitable high-quality forage from early summer onwards, when hares are facing increased energy demands associated with reproduction (G. McLaren, pers.comm.). In the west, it was the increase in stocking densities associated with the use of fertilisers and greater reliance on silage cutting, along with the development for faster silage cutters, that were associated with the decline in hare numbers.”
The current status of the brown hare (Lepus europaeus) in Britain
(1996) Hutchings, M.R. and Harris, S. School of Biological Sciences, University of Bristol.

(4) “This study describes the extent of fox predation on hares and its potential impact on hare population growth. Because the degree of compensation between mortality factors was unknown, the study does not show that fox predation per se limited the hare population. Nevertheless, our findings are a necessary adjunct to experimental evidence and population studies which suggest that red foxes play a major role in hare population dynamics in many environments.”
Predation by foxes Vulpes vulpes on brown hares Lepus europaeus in central southern England, and its potential impact on annual population growth. (1995)
Reynolds, J.C. & Tapper, S.C.

(5) “This analysis demonstrates that even where farmland habitat is greatly improved, uncontrolled predation prevents hares making full use of its carrying capacity. This helps explain the mixed—and at best modest—success of agri-environment schemes in the UK and elsewhere in Europe to increase hare densities. Game-shooting estates, on which effective predator control takes place, probably have a special significance within the landscape as source areas for brown hares.”
The consequences of predator control for brown hares (Lepus europaeus) on UK farmland. (2010) Reynolds, J.C., Stoate, C., Brockless, M.H., Aebischer, N.J. & Tapper, S.C.

(6) Summary of game law analysis
“For a considerable proportion of those responding to this section of the consultation paper, game law is a sensitive subject, raising issues of landowner rights and species conservation in equal measures. Despite broad agreement with most of the questions, and low levels of disagreement, there is a contrast between the individual views of the landowner/shooter-stalker lobby and those of the more conservation orientated lobby. The former are of the opinion that game should be treated primarily as a commodity (and a valuable one at that which requires protection and sustainable management). As such, they would prefer to see modernised game law either amended - but retained broadly in its existing form - or repealed and consolidated into a single game law statute. The latter views game as any wild species and would prefer to see provisions for their protection and management repealed and brought within the scope of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981. This contrast is exemplified in the analysis of responses to Question 21 which shows that 47% of those responding were supportive of either option a or b, with 44% supportive of option c. Furthermore, the game proposals that had least agreement were those that sought to align the protection and management of game species with that already available for quarry species under the 1981 Act.”
The Scottish Government Consultation report

(7) “Of the ten original terrestrial mammals with SAPS (Species Action Plans), targets were either exceeded or achieved for four: otters, water voles, pipistrelles and lesser horseshoe bats. Trends for five priority species were encouraging, like the otter’s continued recovery, increasing numbers for brown hares, and greater and lesser horseshoe bats, and the polecat’s slow recovery.”
The State of Britain’s Mammals 2011, a report for the People’s Trust for Endangered Species by Prof. David Macdonald and Dr Dawn Burnham, WildCru, Dept of Zoology, University of Oxford.

(8) Hunt sightings as a tool for monitoring the distribution and abundance of brown hare Lepus europeaus in UK agricultural landscapes (2010), Kilshaw K, Sellars P, Baker S, Macdonald D, Johnson P, Mammal Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences.

(9) “There has been a significant decline in the bag index between 1961 and 2009. The trend has reversed since the 1980s. The decline phase has been linked to the reduction of agricultural diversity through intensification, and increased predation pressure as fox numbers rose. The increase coincides with the introduction of set-aside and agri-environment schemes that have restored some habitat diversity to farmland.”
Recent trends from the National Gamebag Census, Index of bag density from 1961 to 2009, (Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust website).

(10) Dos and don’ts for farmers
• Hares like a ‘patchwork quilt’ farmland. Break up large blocks of cereal as much as possible.
• Use set-aside as a wildlife habitat. A series of 20-metre strips is ideal if it is planted under the Wild Bird Cover Option.
• On arable farms, mown grass strips will provide summer grazing. Run them across open fields rather than alongside hedgerows where predators may lie in wait.
• Hares need quiet, undisturbed cover for raising leverets. On livestock farms leave some areas of grass uncut and ungrazed for leverets to hide in.
• When making silage, cut the field from the centre outwards rather than from the outside in, so that hares can escape the machinery into neighbouring fields.
• Planting game crops for pheasants will provide cover and food for hares.
• Don’t use herbicides such as paraquat, which are known to kill hares.
• Don’t shoot hares in late winter unless you are sure crops are being damaged. A February hare shoot can remove 60% of the breeding stock.
• Don’t let poaching jeopardise the hare population. Contact the local police Wildlife Liaison Officer to get help on this. (Game and Wildlife Conservation Trust website)

(11) “After the autumn rest period, the first indication of a new reproductive cycle occurred in November with an increase in the size and activity of the testes. This trend continued during December, January and February by which time the reproductive tract was again fully functional. During this time there were striking changes in behaviour and matings were witnessed. Females resumed breeding in January with a marked synchrony in the timing of the first ovulation of the season. Mating preceded ovulation, and the first pregnancy normally resulted in a single fetus, although pregnancy failure was common at this time. By March and April the hares showed full reproductive activity with 100% of females pregnant and most carrying three or more fetuses.”
Professor Gerald A. Lincoln, Senior Research Fellow at the University of Edinburgh (Reproductive and Developmental Sciences) (1974) Reproduction and March Madness in the Brown hare (Lepus europaeus) J. Zool. Lond 174: 1-14

(12) “Although the introduction of a close season currently seems unlikely to offer significant benefits in terms of conservation it could be argued that animal welfare would be enhanced. This would be in terms of reducing the number of female hares killed when nursing wholly dependent young. The data on pregnancy, gestation length and weaning indicate that the period when the majority of females would have litters that were currently reliant on them would last from around mid-March through to mid-October. Females do become pregnant in January so a close season beginning in mid-February might be more appropriate. Attaining virtually complete prevention of nursing hares being killed would require an open season lasting only from mid-December through to the end of January. However, consideration would need to be given to allowing landowners and farmers the opportunity to cull hares during the close season in relation to crop and forestry damage, especially in eastern England. This is the case elsewhere in Europe, for instance, in Denmark where licences can be issued for this purpose.”
An overview of the current status and protection of the Brown Hare
(Lepus europaeus) in the UK
A report prepared for European Wildlife Division, Defra by Dr David Cowan, Central Science Laboratory
August 2004

(13) “The extensive organised hare shoots that currently take place in February are considered by many participants to have a pest control as well as sporting context (Stoate & Tapper 1993). Hence, the introduction of a close season for hunting hares might have more limited overall benefit, in terms of welfare, than anticipated. Indeed most culling that currently takes place from March onwards is likely to be in the context of pest control, except for illegal poaching activities. Culling of hares in order to reduce illegal poaching and coursing, as is apparently common practice in eastern England, will also often take place during any proposed close season. This would offer further ambiguity with regard to welfare issues. In this context, the negative welfare consequences of culling potentially lactating hares would need to be set against possible gains in terms of reducing the use of the less humane methods associated with illegal activities.”
An overview of the current status and protection of the Brown Hare
(Lepus europaeus) in the UK
A report prepared for European Wildlife Division, Defra by Dr David Cowan, Central Science Laboratory
August 2004

(14) Hares

Mr. Greg Knight: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what representations he has received, and from whom, on the introduction of a closed season for the shooting of hares; and if he will make a statement. [137136]

Barry Gardiner [holding answer 15 May 2007]: My Department has received representations in support of this matter from several hon. Members on behalf of
17 May 2007 : Column 887W
constituents, (including Mr. Rodney Hale, chairman of the British Brown Hare Preservation Society), a petition signed by 505 members of the public, and letters from four further individuals.

Brown hares are not protected by a close season in the UK. In part, this is because it is recognised that hares can cause serious agricultural damage, and farmers need the flexibility to address problems when they occur. But mainly it is because there is currently no evidence that the introduction of a close season would significantly enhance hare numbers. Hare numbers have declined throughout Europe despite protection with close seasons.

The Hare Preservation Act 1892 forbids the sale of hares during the notional main breeding season of 1 March to 31 July inclusive. This discourages farmers from shooting hares for commercial gain at this time, and aims to limit control during the breeding season to that necessary for crop protection.

The current view of the Brown Hare Species Action Plan Steering Group is that habitat changes due to modern farming practices, rather than hunting or shooting, are the main cause of population decline in the brown hare. The steering group, which advises DEFRA on this species, has therefore not recommended the establishment of a close season. If there is any change to this advice then a case for new legislation to protect the brown hare would be considered.

(15) Hares
Andrew Rosindell: To ask the Secretary of State for Environment, Food and Rural Affairs what estimate she has made of the size of the population of wild hares in each of the last five years. [112112]

Richard Benyon: DEFRA has made no assessment of hare numbers in the last five years. The last national survey of the brown hare was carried out in 1995 [Hutchings, M.R. & Harris S. (1995) “The current status of the brown hare (Lepus europaeus) in Britain. JNCC”] when the English population was estimated to be about half a million. Data collected for the ongoing Tracking Mammals Partnership Surveillance Scheme and British Trust for Ornithology/Joint Nature Conservation Committee/Royal Society for the Protection of Birds Breeding Bird Survey indicate that overall the national population is stable although there are regional variations.