BASC initiates legal action against Natural England over gamebird licensing

BASC has today begun legal proceedings against Natural England by issuing a Pre-Action Protocol (PAP) letter regarding its handling of the licensing regime for the release of gamebirds.

By issuing a PAP letter, BASC has taken the first step towards a Judicial Review of Natural England’s (NE) handling of the matter.

This step follows months of engagement with NE, during which BASC raised serious concerns about the legality, transparency and workability of the new individual licensing system introduced for releasing pheasants and red-legged partridges on or near Special Protection Areas (SPAs) in England.

BASC believes that NE’s current licensing system is legally flawed and causing unnecessary problems for shoots trying to follow the rules. At the heart of the case is concern that NE has wrongly interpreted the definition of ‘release’ to be when birds are placed into secure release pens, rather than when they are released into the wild.

BASC is also challenging NE’s decision to extend the licensing rules beyond the legal boundary, forcing shoots to apply for licences even when releasing birds outside the designated zones. These actions, BASC argues, go beyond what the law allows.

BASC warns that NE’s approach risks undermining the very conservation goals it is meant to support. Game management, predator control and habitat improvements, much of it privately funded and volunteer-led, are often inseparable from shooting activities. Shooting contributes over £500 million annually in conservation work – equivalent to 26,000 full-time jobs – delivering outcomes that cannot be easily replicated by the public sector alone.

BASC’s chief executive, Ian Bell, said: “We have exhausted all other options in trying to work through these issues constructively. While we remain committed to cooperation with government and its agencies, Natural England’s licensing approach is legally flawed, unworkable, and risks real harm to conservation and rural livelihoods.

“We have tried to resolve this through dialogue, but progress has been limited. We are now taking legal action on behalf of our members because they deserve clarity, fairness and proper recognition of the vital role they play in managing the countryside.”