PFD report

Bonamie Elena Miriam Armitage · Prevention of Future Deaths report

Pin Get email alerts Request correction

Issued 25 May 2017•Gloucestershire

Report record

Published report and response evidence

This page connects the concerns raised in this report with statements found in recipients’ published responses. A link shows a clear evidence connection; it does not assign responsibility.

View original report
Concerns
4

Raised in this report

Recipients
3

Named on the report

Responses found
1

Of 3 recipients

Stated actions
2

Described in responses

Recipients and published responses

Source document

Full report text

This is the full text from the original published report.

Open published report

Concerns and recipient responses

Select any concern, action or position to view the source wording.

Concerns raised4

  1. Lack of a mandatory personal protective equipment requirement for child Hunt participants
    Part of recurring concern: Inadequate protective equipment requirements for hunting-event participants
  2. Lack of a stipulated adult-supervisor-to-child-rider ratio for Hunts
  3. Lack of a mandatory competence requirement for child Hunt participants
Responses linked to these concerns

Each statement is shown once, even when linked to more than one concern.

Actions described in response An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.1

  1. Action

    Issue guidance on headgear relevant to Hunt staff and followers.

    Stated by Master of Foxhounds Association (MFHAStated completedThe respondent said that this action was complete when they made their response on 31 August 2017.

Respondent positions A position is what a recipient says about a concern when it does not describe a specific action.5

  1. Position

    The Association cannot compel individuals or hunts to follow safety guidance or enforce recommended safety measures.

    Stated by Master of Foxhounds Association (MFHAUnable to actThe respondent said that a constraint prevented them from taking the relevant action.

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of a mandatory personal protective equipment requirement for child Hunt participants

Wider context from the report

“(1) There is no mandatory requirement that all child participants in a Hunt are required to wear personal protective equipment, (2) There is no mandatory requirement that all child participants in a Hunt are required to demonstrate an established level of competence before participating in a Hunt. (3) There is no mandatory requirement that children are supervised by adult riders when participating in a Hunt, and no ratio of adult supervisors to child riders is stipulated. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

Yes — Inadequate protective equipment requirements for hunting-event participants.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of a stipulated adult-supervisor-to-child-rider ratio for Hunts

Wider context from the report

“(1) There is no mandatory requirement that all child participants in a Hunt are required to wear personal protective equipment, (2) There is no mandatory requirement that all child participants in a Hunt are required to demonstrate an established level of competence before participating in a Hunt. (3) There is no mandatory requirement that children are supervised by adult riders when participating in a Hunt, and no ratio of adult supervisors to child riders is stipulated. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of a mandatory competence requirement for child Hunt participants

Wider context from the report

“(1) There is no mandatory requirement that all child participants in a Hunt are required to wear personal protective equipment, (2) There is no mandatory requirement that all child participants in a Hunt are required to demonstrate an established level of competence before participating in a Hunt. (3) There is no mandatory requirement that children are supervised by adult riders when participating in a Hunt, and no ratio of adult supervisors to child riders is stipulated. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this individual concern was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the report wording shown below. Response links show a clear evidence connection; they do not assign responsibility.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Lack of a mandatory adult-rider supervision requirement for child Hunt participants

Wider context from the report

“(1) There is no mandatory requirement that all child participants in a Hunt are required to wear personal protective equipment, (2) There is no mandatory requirement that all child participants in a Hunt are required to demonstrate an established level of competence before participating in a Hunt. (3) There is no mandatory requirement that children are supervised by adult riders when participating in a Hunt, and no ratio of adult supervisors to child riders is stipulated. ”

Is this part of a recurring concern?

No recurring-concern membership is currently published.

Open source report

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Issue guidance on headgear relevant to Hunt staff and followers.

Verbatim wording from the response

“MFHA Guidance The MFHA has issued guidance in the past relating to health and safety of Hunt staff, but has never sought to regulate hunting by way of guidance to those who subscribe to Hunts or who ride with Hunts as guests. The MFHA maintains no records of Hunt followers and has no rules about the way in which they conduct themselves. We have in the past issued guidance on such matters as headgear, which is relevant both to Hunt staff and to followers. This organisation has no power to compel individuals to follow that guidance, nor to enforce any steps that we might recommend.”

Source location

2017-0170-Response-by-MFH-Association
Page 2 · response
Published 31 August 2017

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

The Association cannot compel individuals or hunts to follow safety guidance or enforce recommended safety measures.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The Rules set out above show that the MFHA has wide powers to adopt, instigate and enact new Rules. Proposed new Rules are discussed by the Committee at its regular meetings and, if agreed, are then put to the next Annual General Meeting for the members to approve or otherwise. However, the Committee is unlikely to recommend Rules that it believes would not be widely accepted and adhered to by members and the wider hunting community and in these circumstances the voluntary nature of hunting lends itself better to the issuance of Guidance Notes. The Association cannot compel members to follow any guidance issued.”

Source location

2017-0170-Response-by-MFH-Association
Page 2 · response
Published 31 August 2017

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

A predetermined adult-to-child supervision ratio is unnecessary because supervision should vary with the competence of each rider and pony.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Response: Many of the most talented riders engaging in hunting will be in the age bracket of 11 to 17. Some of those riders will be of an International standard for equestrian events. To that extent, it would not be necessary or desirable that riders of considerable ability and experience should require supervision from an adult who may well be less competent. In my experience, and the experience of our members, most of the occasions where unsafe riding is identified, will be amongst the adult contingent. Hunts will determine for themselves whether any formal Rules are required in relation to supervision, but I regard the view taken by the Cotswold Hunt to be a sensible approach.”

Source location

2017-0170-Response-by-MFH-Association
Page 3 · response
Published 31 August 2017

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

The Association has no authority over hunts outside its membership, including unregistered hunts and hunts governed by other associations.

Verbatim wording from the response

“You have determined in paragraph 6 of that Report that in your opinion action should be taken to prevent future deaths and that my organisation has the power to take such action. You should be aware that the powers of the MFHA are limited. Whilst we as an organisation regulate hunting there are many Hunts that are outside any jurisdiction that we might have. By way of example, the MFHA does not regulate Hunts that operate through the Association of Masters of Harriers and Beagles, under the Masters of Deerhounds Association and the Masters of Drag hounds and Bloodhounds Association. In addition, there are a number of unregistered Hunts with which the MFHA has no contact.”

Source location

2017-0170-Response-by-MFH-Association
Page 1 · response
Published 31 August 2017

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Formal qualifications should not be mandatory because children may establish competence through previous experience and supervised participation.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Response: At present the proposed Risk Assessment states that children aged 14 to 17 may ride unsupervised provided that they hold the Pony Club C Test, or an equivalent qualification, or have demonstrated their competence by previous experience. I understand that the Inquest Health and Safety Authority indicated that children from the age of 11 upwards would be able to ride independently if they held the C Test. In my experience, an established level of competence can be obtained through children’s Hunts and through riding whilst accompanied by a more experienced participant (often a parent). Thereafter, the level of competence is secured by experience, which is the case in many sports which carry an element of risk.”

Source location

2017-0170-Response-by-MFH-Association
Page 2 · response
Published 31 August 2017

Open published response

Source evidence

How this respondent position was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Individual hunts should determine whether formal supervision rules are required for their participants.

Verbatim wording from the response

“Response: Many of the most talented riders engaging in hunting will be in the age bracket of 11 to 17. Some of those riders will be of an International standard for equestrian events. To that extent, it would not be necessary or desirable that riders of considerable ability and experience should require supervision from an adult who may well be less competent. In my experience, and the experience of our members, most of the occasions where unsafe riding is identified, will be amongst the adult contingent. Hunts will determine for themselves whether any formal Rules are required in relation to supervision, but I regard the view taken by the Cotswold Hunt to be a sensible approach.”

Source location

2017-0170-Response-by-MFH-Association
Page 3 · response
Published 31 August 2017

Open published response

Other statements in published responses

These actions and other statements could not be clearly connected to one concern in this report.

Recipient-stated actions An action is something a recipient says it has done, is doing, or plans to do in response to a concern raised.1

  1. 1

    Continue reviewing safety issues associated with hunting activities.

    Stated by Master of Foxhounds Association (MFHAStated in progressThe respondent said that this action was in progress when they made their response on 31 August 2017.

Source evidence

How this respondent action was interpreted

PFD Monitor created a concise, searchable interpretation from the published response wording shown below.

PFD Monitor interpretation

Continue reviewing safety issues associated with hunting activities.

Verbatim wording from the response

“The MFHA will obviously continue to keep issues of safety under review. Obviously, the death of Bonamie Armitage was a tragedy, but accidents involving young riders in the hunting field are very rare. More frequent are the accidents involving adults which reflects the fact that following hounds across country on an undetermined route can never be entirely free of risk.”

Source location

2017-0170-Response-by-MFH-Association
Page 3 · response
Published 31 August 2017

Open published response
Back to top

Information checked against the published report and official responses · Data reviewed 7 Sep 2026 · About data quality and limitations

Data last updated 7 September 2026