Upholding Nature Protections: Court overturns South Downs shooting ecision

 

ELF was successful in challenging a decision by the South Downs National Park Authority (SDNPA). The challenge came from a local resident concerned about the regularisation of operational hours for clay target shooting at St Mary’s Farm, Polowood Shooting Ground.  

The site, located within a broadleaved woodland in the South Downs National Park, is a protected landscape characterized by its “tranquil and unspoilt places”. Despite a history of local opposition and previous attempts to increase activity, the SDNPA granted permission on 24 December 2025 to increase operations to six days per week—potentially 312 days per year.  

Key concerns with this approval included inappropriate land use, with the activity being unsuitable for a protected National Park, the impact on wildlife as noise exposure from increased shooting can cause significant harm to local wildlife and harm to recreation with the constant noise disrupts the peaceful recreation of local residents and walkers in the area. 

With the assistance of Gabriel Nelson of Francis Taylor Building, ELF issued a judicial review pre-action protocol letter, arguing that the decision was unlawful on several grounds. Our challenge focused on three main points. Firstly, new laws require National Parks to “further” the protection of natural beauty and wildlife. We argued that the Authority merely stayed “mindful” of these goals rather than actually trying to facilitate them. Secondly, the Authority didn’t explain how a massive increase in shooting noise could possibly help “further” the goals of a peaceful National Park. Finally, though the Council looked at how the noise affected humans, they completely failed to investigate how constant gunfire would impact the local animals and the ecosystem. 

Following this letter, the Authority agreed they had made a legal error in allowing the decision. With the help of Richard Buxton Solicitors, the decision was quashed. This case sends a clear message that National Park Authorities have strong legal obligations with regards to nature, and that treating these obligations as a mere tick box exercise may open them up to legal challenge.