  Hunters and Rabbit game is played on a graph $G$ where the Hunter player
shoots at $k$ vertices in every round while the Rabbit player occupies an
unknown vertex and, if not shot, must move to a neighbouring vertex after each
round. The Rabbit player wins if it can ensure that its position is never shot.
The Hunter player wins otherwise. The hunter number $h(G)$ of a graph $G$ is
the minimum integer $k$ such that the Hunter player has a winning strategy
(i.e., allowing him to win whatever be the strategy of the Rabbit player). This
game has been studied in several graph classes, in particular in bipartite
graphs (grids, trees, hypercubes...), but the computational complexity of
computing $h(G)$ remains open in general graphs and even in trees. To progress
further, we propose a notion of monotonicity for the Hunters and Rabbit game
imposing that, roughly, a vertex that has already been shot ``must not host the
rabbit anymore''. This allows us to obtain new results in various graph
classes.
  Let the monotone hunter number be denoted by $mh(G)$. We show that $pw(G)
\leq mh(G) \leq pw(G)+1$ for any graph $G$ with pathwidth $pw(G)$, implying
that computing $mh(G)$, or even approximating $mh(G)$ up to an additive
constant, is NP-hard. Then, we show that $mh(G)$ can be computed in polynomial
time in split graphs, interval graphs, cographs and trees. These results go
through structural characterisations which allow us to relate the monotone
hunter number with the pathwidth in some of these graph classes. In all cases,
this allows us to specify the hunter number or to show that there may be an
arbitrary gap between $h$ and $mh$, i.e., that monotonicity does not help. In
particular, we show that, for every $k\geq 3$, there exists a tree $T$ with
$h(T)=2$ and $mh(T)=k$. We conclude by proving that computing $h$ (resp., $mh$)
is FPT parameterised by the minimum size of a vertex cover.
