Deer fencing, game rearing and shooting infrastructure

Deer fencing usually needs planning permission, because the permitted development right for means of enclosure stops at 2 metres and a deer fence that actually works is taller than that. The right sits in Schedule 2 Part 2 Class A of the Town and Country Planning (General Permitted Development) (England) Order 2015, and it allows a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure up to 2 metres in height, dropping to 1 metre where the enclosure adjoins a highway used by vehicular traffic or a footway of such a highway.

Game rearing infrastructure is a harder question again, because it turns on whether rearing birds for sport counts as agriculture. In most cases it does not.

The permitted development right for means of enclosure

Class A of Part 2 permits the erection, construction, maintenance, improvement or alteration of a gate, fence, wall or other means of enclosure. The height limits are the whole of the control, and they are measured from ground level on the higher side where levels differ.

The right is withdrawn in several situations that catch rural sites regularly:

• Where the enclosure would be within the curtilage of a listed building, or would form a boundary with the curtilage of a listed building
• Where the land is a scheduled monument, or the works would affect one
• Where an Article 4 direction has removed the right, which some National Park authorities and conservation area councils have done
• Where the enclosure exceeds 1 metre and adjoins a highway used by vehicular traffic

Two practical points follow. A fence of 1.8 metres with a top wire taking it to 2.1 metres is over the limit, because the wire is part of the means of enclosure. And replacing an existing 2.4 metre fence on the same line is not automatically permitted, because Class A allows improvement or alteration only where the height does not exceed the limit or the height of the original enclosure.

Where the fence is needed for stock control on agricultural land, the separate agricultural rights in Part 6 may help, but only on a holding that qualifies and only for works reasonably necessary for agriculture.

Height, highways and visibility

A deer fence for red or fallow deer is typically 1.8 to 2.0 metres, and for a secure enclosure it goes higher. Roe deer exclusion fencing can be lower. None of this changes the planning limit, so the honest position on most estates is that a deer fence is an application.

That application is rarely controversial in itself. Officers look at the length of the run, its relationship to the skyline, the gauge and colour of the mesh, whether it is post-and-wire or a solid barrier, and whether the line follows an existing field boundary or cuts across open ground. A fence following a hedge line is far easier to defend than one drawn across a valley side.

Where the fence adjoins a road, the highway authority will comment on visibility splays at gates and on the risk of deer being funnelled towards a crossing point. Gates set back from the carriageway so a vehicle can stand clear while they are opened usually resolve that.

Whether game rearing is agriculture

Section 336 of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990 defines agriculture to include the breeding and keeping of livestock, and defines livestock to include any creature kept for the production of food, wool, skins or fur, or for the purpose of its use in the farming of land.

Birds reared for release and subsequent shooting are not generally kept for any of those purposes. The consequence is that rearing pens, feed stores and keeper's buildings serving a shoot usually fall outside the agricultural permitted development rights in Part 6, and outside the agricultural occupancy arguments that go with them. A building put up under Part 6 for agriculture and then used for game rearing is also a change of use.

There is genuine uncertainty at the edges. A holding that rears birds and sells a proportion into the food chain sits in a greyer area, and inspectors have taken different views depending on the evidence of the actual operation. If the answer matters, the safe route is a certificate of lawfulness under section 191 or 192 of the 1990 Act rather than an assumption.

Release pens, feeders and tracks in woodland

Release pens are usually low-key in planning terms. A pen formed of posts and netting within woodland may fall within the means of enclosure right if it stays under 2 metres, and the ancillary items that go with it, feeders, drinkers and water bowsers, are generally chattels rather than operational development.

The tracks are different. A new or improved track through woodland is an engineering operation, and whether it is permitted depends on which right you are relying on. Forestry operations have their own private way rights in Part 6, subject to prior approval of siting and means of construction. For anything else, expect to apply. The same logic applies to farm tracks and new accesses, where the surfacing, the drainage and the cut-and-fill are what officers actually examine.

Buildings for a shoot, a game larder, a chiller, a keeper's store, are operational development needing permission on almost every site, and in the Green Belt they engage the inappropriate development tests.

Protected sites and designated landscapes

Releasing common pheasant and red-legged partridge on or near European protected sites is regulated separately from planning. Both species were added to Schedule 9 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act 1981 in England, which means releases on or close to a special area of conservation or special protection area need a licence. The terms of the relevant general licence change, so check the current version on gov.uk before you plan a release programme.

Within a site of special scientific interest, operations likely to damage the special interest need Natural England's consent under section 28E of the 1981 Act. Fencing, track construction, pen erection and supplementary feeding are all capable of falling within a notified list of operations, and consent is separate from any planning permission.

In a National Landscape or National Park, section 85 of the Countryside and Rights of Way Act 2000, as amended by the Levelling-up and Regeneration Act 2023, requires relevant authorities to seek to further the statutory purposes. That duty raises the bar on landscape evidence. A Landscape and Visual Impact Assessment proportionate to the scheme is often the difference between an approval and a refusal, and the general approach to landscape and visual evidence for a countryside application applies here without modification.

Public rights of way and fencing

A fence that obstructs a public right of way is a wilful obstruction under section 137 of the Highways Act 1980, and planning permission does not authorise it. Permission and rights of way are separate regimes, and councils will grant one while enforcing the other.

If the fence line has to cross a path, the options are a gap, a gate or stile authorised by the highway authority under section 147 of the 1980 Act, or a diversion order under section 119. Diversion orders take months and can be objected to. Build that into the programme rather than discovering it at the point of construction.

Deer gates on paths are a common compromise. They must be openable by the public, and the authority will specify the furniture.

Appearance and conditions in sensitive landscapes

Councils tend to condition rather than refuse fencing schemes. Expect a mesh specification and colour, a requirement to remove the fence when the use ceases, a planting scheme along exposed lengths, and in some cases a limit on the period of the permission.

Temporary permissions are worth asking for where the need is time-limited, such as protecting new woodland planting until the trees are above browsing height. A five or ten year permission with a removal condition is often easier for an officer to grant than a permanent one.

Set the case out in a Planning Statement that explains the deer pressure, the management purpose, the alternatives considered and the removal arrangements. Where the fencing encloses land you also intend to treat as garden, read the position on extending a curtilage in the countryside first, because the two applications interact.

This is general guidance rather than legal advice. Check the position with your local planning authority or a qualified professional before relying on it, and remember that a lawful development certificate is the only formal way to confirm that works are lawful. PlanScope provides AI-assisted draft reports for planning applications. Reports should be reviewed before submission. We do not guarantee planning approval.