A closed season to protect pregnant hares was promised – where is the legislation?
A leveret in Suffolk (imageBROKER.com/Alamy)
3 min read
In the King’s Speech last week, the government quietly dropped a bill that would have finally given legal protection to hares after centuries of persecution.
For weeks, there were clear signs that legislation would be included in the King’s Speech. The proposal appeared in House of Commons briefing paper and was reported in the Financial Times as part of the expected programme. After years of campaigning and parliamentary work, many believed that England and Wales would finally join Scotland and most of Europe in protecting hares during the breeding season.
Then the proposal disappeared.
First, references to a close season were absent from the Lords Library briefing paper. Then there was no mention of hares, or indeed of the expected Animal Welfare Bill, in the King’s Speech itself. Finally, “environment” and “animal welfare” have been erased from the title of the third day of parliamentary debates on the King’s Speech: the Lords Library briefing paper suggested that the debate would be titled “energy, environment and animal welfare”. The debate’s title has since been changed to “education, culture, technology and energy security”.
That is not a coincidence. It is a political decision.
The strange thing is that this should not be a difficult issue. Hares are the only game species in England and Wales without a statutory close season. They can still be shot during the months when they are pregnant or raising young. Scotland already protects hares during this period. Most European countries do the same.
The government itself has already accepted the principle. Labour’s 2024 manifesto promised to “protect our landscapes and wildlife”. Defra’s Animal Welfare Strategy for England, published only a few months ago, stated that the government would consider how to introduce a close season for hares as part of a broader commitment to strengthen animal welfare protections and establish Britain as a global leader in this field.
Yet when the time came to act, both the close season proposal and the Animal Welfare Bill disappeared from the legislative programme.
This is especially disappointing because support for reform is broad and serious.
Campaigners, conservationists, veterinarians, rural organisations, writers and parliamentarians from different parties have worked for years to build the case. Petitions have gathered support. Open letters have been signed. Exhibitions have been held in Parliament. The argument has been made carefully, patiently and repeatedly.
Governments are free to change priorities. But they should also be honest about what they are doing
Public opinion is also clear. Polling by More in Common found that 66 per cent of the public support a close season for hares, while only six per cent oppose it. Most people simply do not realise that hares are the only game species left without seasonal protection under the law.
When they find out, they are surprised.
And rightly so.
A close season is not an extreme proposal. It would not prevent farmers from protecting crops where genuine damage occurs. It would simply stop hares being routinely shot during the breeding season. It would bring England and Wales into line with standards already accepted elsewhere.
Instead, another breeding season will now pass without protection.
Governments are free to change priorities. But they should also be honest about what they are doing. Measures that appeared ready for legislation were removed quietly and without explanation.
That matters because trust in public commitments matters too.
Still, this issue will not disappear. The facts have not changed. Public support has not weakened. The case for reform remains strong, practical and widely supported.
Sooner or later, Parliament will have to act. When it does, people will ask a simple question: if this reform was so reasonable, why was it delayed for so long?
Baroness Helic is a Conservative peer
