If you’re running a secure dog field without planning permission – or plotting your first or next one – you’ve got a rare and temporary window of opportunity.
Right now, retrospective planning applications are not subject to Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG) requirements.
That means:
- No mandatory BNG assessment (and the ridiculous bills that come with it)
- No 30-year Habitat Management and Monitoring Plan hanging over your head
- No Section 106 Agreement – a legally binding financial obligation to pay for decades of monitoring and reporting that adds nothing to the actual ecology of the site.
Everything else in planning still applies – access, flood risk assessments, traffic, noise, general ecology – but this one heavyweight requirement is currently off the table.
This loophole wasn’t designed for dog fields, but it’s working in our favour for now. Don’t think of it as being naughty; it’s not. It’s just that for once, the system hasn’t yet realised it’s punishing the wrong people. So use it while it’s here.
And just to be clear – this only applies in England.
Wales is running on a completely different system. Instead of the statutory Biodiversity Net Gain requirement, Welsh planning policy uses a principle called Net Benefit for Biodiversity (NBB). It’s similar in spirit but far less rigid – there’s no fixed 10% metric, no mandatory 30-year management plan, and no BNG register. So if your site’s in Wales, you’re not bound by the same rules (yet), although you’ll still need to demonstrate that your development delivers a clear biodiversity benefit overall.
What is Biodiversity Net Gain (BNG)?
BNG sounds wholesome – a policy designed to make sure new developments leave nature better than before. The trouble is, it was built for housing estates and logistics depots, not for a couple of acres of pasture fenced off for boisterous rascals.
Under BNG, developers must demonstrate a 10% increase in biodiversity. That means mapping habitats, calculating units, and committing to long-term management. For dog field owners, it often translates to expensive reports, inflated costs, and a 30-year legal promise to maintain features that may not even need maintaining.
Dog fields usually improve land yet they’re treated like mini airports.
Want to know everything about BNG and dog fields? Click here.
Why the loophole works
BNG requirements apply to planning applications submitted after:
- 12 February 2024 for major developments
- 2 April 2024 for minor ones
But retrospective applications, made under Section 73A of the Town and Country Planning Act 1990, fall outside those rules. They’re for developments already built and running.
Likewise, Section 73 applications – the ones that tweak existing permissions also slip through.
This isn’t urban legend; it’s confirmed in government guidance: Biodiversity Net Gain – GOV.UK
So yes – it’s real, and yes – you can use it.
What counts as ‘retrospective’?
To qualify, your site must already exist in full working order – gates up, fencing in, dogs running, bookings happening. It’s not something you can pre-emptively apply for before you’ve lifted a post driver.
There’s no set time frame, but councils expect to see clear evidence that the field is operational: photos, invoices, signage, maybe even a few happy-dog videos. If you’ve been running for months or years without permission, you’re the textbook case.
Still get your PEA (trust me)
Even if you’re applying retrospectively (and especially if you’re considering this as a strategy to open your field), it’s still worth commissioning a Preliminary Ecological Appraisal (PEA).
Think of it as your ecological insurance policy – a clear, professional baseline that shows what’s on site now. It helps if any awkward questions come up later, and it stops you accidentally falling foul of protected species or habitats.
A PEA is also the first building block of a good planning application. It shows you’re responsible, transparent, and taking ecology seriously – without getting sucked into the bureaucratic swamp of full BNG compliance.
Cost Savings: More Than Just One Less Survey
BNG doesn’t just mean ‘an ecologist visit’. It drags along an entire circus of commitments, paperwork, and ongoing costs.
You’re expected to:
- Produce a BNG Metric Calculation showing pre- and post-development habitats.
- Write or commission a 30-year Habitat Management and Monitoring Plan (HMMP) – complete with monitoring schedules, targets, and reporting.
- Sometimes even register your site with a national database so it can be tracked for the next three decades.
- And, if your numbers don’t quite add up, buy ‘biodiversity units’ off-site – often thousands of pounds per unit
…not to mention fulfilling the obligations of achieving your BNG.
All of that can turn a modest dog field project into a bureaucratic black hole. We’ve seen examples where local planners (and their favourite consultants) propose frankly ridiculous ‘ecological enhancements’ – wildflower corridors that don’t suit the soil, or annual monitoring fees that would make a National Trust ranger blush.
That’s why using a planning consultant is more important now than ever. A good one knows what actually applies, what doesn’t, and what you can push back on.
When you’ve got evidence-based information and a consultant who understands the legislation, it’s a lot easier to prove when a council officer is – how shall we say – talking out of their arsehole.
A consultant won’t just save you money; they’ll save you sanity.
Don’t Get Talked Into Eco-Nonsense
One of the fastest ways to waste money and potentially wreck your site is to let someone who doesn’t understand dog fields design your ‘ecological enhancements’.
We’ve seen it all:
- Deep ponds (what could possibly go wrong?)
- Wildflower meadows full of toxic plants
- Woodland planting schemes that turn a usable field into a massive weave pole maze
- ‘Habitat piles’ that become rodant hotels overnight
Most of these ideas come from well-meaning ecologists who are working from the wrong context – they’re used to housing estates, not working fields full of paying customers and unpredictable dogs.
If you’re required to provide ecological enhancements, they need to be appropriate for your land use. You can improve biodiversity and keep the site safe, functional, and beautiful – but only if you push back against unsuitable recommendations.
This is another moment where having a planning consultant who knows dog fields pays for itself. They can evidence what’s reasonable, justify alternatives, and protect you from being tricked into installing expensive or dangerous nonsense just to tick a box.
A ‘biodiversity enhancement’ that poisons someone’s spaniel or creates a health and safety headache isn’t doing anyone any favours.
What BNG Doesn’t Value (But Should)
Here’s the absurd bit: some of the most valuable biodiversity work you can do on a dog field like planting or restoring hedgerows – barely counts towards BNG.
Linear habitats such as hedgerows, ditches, and field margins are measured separately, by length, and their scoring contribution is minuscule compared to area-based habitats like grassland. If you want to put in a fabulous mixed hedgrow brimming with fruit and hidy holes for things to live and and on, whilst creating a visual barrier between you and some farm ‘goings ons’, it’ll count for diddly squat. Now that doesn’t mean you shouldn’t invest in it but it’s not going to do you the favours you think it might on paper.
So the very things that genuinely improve wildlife corridors and connectivity across the countryside – thicker, species-rich hedges, wild edges, native planting – don’t actually move your BNG numbers in a meaningful way.
That’s one more reason the current approach is so flawed, and why this loophole matters for small rural projects that are already doing the right thing.
A real-world example: Oaklands Dog Field
Oaklands Dog Field opened several years ago, back when dog fields were still the Wild West of planning. Councils couldn’t agree whether you even needed permission. There were no checklists, no guidance notes, no ‘how to’ pages – just a lot of people trying to do the right thing on small bits of farmland.
So Oaklands did what hundreds of responsible owners did: fenced a neat plot, set up an online booking system, and quietly became a much-loved local amenity.
Then, years later, one anonymous complaint triggered an enforcement notice – and suddenly a well-managed, community-friendly business was on the wrong side of planning.
When Oaklands came to us, the task wasn’t about covering up mistakes; it was about catching up with the system. We gathered evidence of good management, collated years of records, and produced a full retrospective application that ticked every modern policy box – all while neatly sidestepping the BNG minefield.
Here’s what the owner said once planning was granted:
“In a very stressful time Hannah and her team have been so supportive & informative throughout the whole process.
Applying for planning permission is a complicated process if you try to do it yourself but having the expertise of Hannah made it so easy.
The extensive pack that was put together for the planning was amazing & covered every area without the council needing to come back with any questions as they had it all there in front of them.Our planning was permitted and I have no doubt without using Hannah this would never have been the case as we’d have missed so many things out that were needed to get the planning through for our much-loved dog field.
We can’t thank you enough.”– Oaklands Dog Field 🌳
Oaklands is the perfect example of what this loophole can do for responsible operators – it’s not about dodging rules, it’s about regularising a site properly, without drowning in bureaucracy or spending thousands on irrelevant paperwork.
How long will the loophole last?
Who knows.
This isn’t a permanent feature of planning law – it’s a temporary blind spot. Once they figure out how to seal the leak they’ll be straight on it with the bureaucratic equivalent of duct tape – new wording, new guidance, and another layer of red tape to make sure no one slips through again.
And when they do, it’ll be too late to take advantage.
Why it matters
Dodging BNG legitimately could save you £3,000–£5,000, plus ongoing obligations that stretch into decades. That’s money better spent improving your site – better fencing, hedge planting, better drainage – things that actually make a difference to the land and the dogs using it.
You’re not skipping responsibility. You’re avoiding unnecessary nonsense.
Responsibility First
Let’s be clear – the BNG loophole isn’t an excuse to be reckless. You can play the system smartly and do the right thing.
If you’ve got a badger sett in the middle of your field, don’t fence it off and call it enrichment. Don’t bulldoze over established wildlife corridors, and don’t assume ‘nature-friendly’ means throwing wildflower seed at everything that stands still.
Dog fields should enhance the land, not endanger what’s already there. Always be aiming to leave your site in better ecological condition than you found it – healthier hedges, more native planting, more structure for wildlife, cleaner watercourses.
If you’re unsure whether your site could fall foul of planning for any reason – maybe you’re near a Heritage Site, sitting on protected land, or have truly dreadful access – let us check it first.
We call it the Red Flag Test: a quick sense-check to spot potential planning nightmares before you spend a penny or drive a single post in. It’s the easiest way to avoid ending up on the wrong side of the system, or worse, wasting money on a site that was never going to work.
In summary
BNG isn’t evil, but it’s being applied bluntly. For small rural projects like dog fields, it’s an expensive mismatch.
Right now, retrospective applications sit in a legal sweet spot – a small mercy in a system not known for its mercy. Use it.
Get your paperwork sorted, commission a PEA, and work with a planning consultant who actually understands the nuances.
Because this loophole won’t last forever, and when it closes, you’ll be back in the ring with the clipboard brigade.
NOTE: Who benefits most?
This loophole matters most for owners whose fields sit on already high-biodiversity land – established high value meadows, woodland, or old pasture where achieving that extra 10% uplift is near impossible without spending thousands on habitat creation that makes no ecological sense. For those sites, avoiding BNG right now isn’t just convenient; it’s the difference between viable and unviable.
We’re already helping dog field owners across the UK with retrospective planning before the BNG curtain comes down. If you’d like support – or you just want to know whether your site qualifies – get in touch before the bureaucrats find the fly in their own ointment.