Field Cricket (Gryllus campestris)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - orthopteran > Grasshopper, cricket or ally |
| Red List Status: | Vulnerable (Not Relevant) [VU(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | Included in the baseline Red List Index for England (Wilkins, Wilson & Brown, 2022) |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | (none) |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Gryllus campestris |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Linnaeus, 1758) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Sutton, 2015 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Listed as Vulnerable on GB Red List and all populations are within England. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | The populations in England are fragmented and there is little chance of natural recolonisation (the species is flightless). The species requires targeted habitat management, to which it can respond well. |
| Question 3: | At a landscape scale, would the species benefit from untargeted habitat management to increase habitat mosaics, structural diversity, or particular successional stages? |
| Response: | No |
| Justification: | This species would not benefit from untargeted management |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 6. Recovery solutions trialled |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Combination or other (detail in comments) |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Structured - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | The species is at the edge of its range in England, being more adapted to a continental climate, with colder winters and warmer spring/summer. It also has specific habitat requirements. Suitable habitat is very fragmented and the species is poor at dispersing, hence the recovery potential is classed as low. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Undertake appropriate habitat management at known sites. Lack of habitat management is considered the key threat to this species in England. The species requires open habitat, with patches of bare ground, short turf, together with patches of taller, tussocky grass. This can be achieved by appropriate mowing or winter grazing. Bracken and scrub control is also needed on most sites. All populations rely on continual management to prevent succession. Where suitable management is not maintained, the populations can decline very quickly. Annual monitoring of the state of the habitat is required at all sites.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: All sites require on-going habitat management. Bracken encroachment has been noted as being a particular problem at the 'Coates complex' sites in W Sussex (Barlavington Estate, Lord's Piece and 'the Park' ), plus several others (2023 Field Cricket report for Natural England)
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Increase connectivity between populations- investigate the potential of using correctly managed field margins to connect populations and/or expand habitat management of existing sites into the surrounding area
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Suitability of field margins lying between Heather Park (Blackmoor Estate, Hampshire) and Blackmoor Golf club has been assessed for a trial to examine the feasibility of using field margins to connect populations (2023 Field cricket report for Natural England)
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Undertake further translocations. Conservation translocation has proven to be a successful conservation action for this species in England (almost all of the current sites have resulted from conservation translocations). Further sites, across the former range of the species in England, should be assessed for their suitability as receptor sites for translocations (some suitable sites in his 2023 Field cricket report for Natural England). Appropriate habitat management could then be implemented at these sites and translocations and subsequent monitoring and reinforcement conducted.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Table of suitable sites as an annexe to 2023 Field cricket report for Natural England- (e.g. Blackmoor Golf Club, The Warren MoD site and Broxhall common in Hampshire).
Comments: On going habitat management at current sites is a priority before translocations to new sites are considered. Native English stock should be used as donor populations. An experimental introduction of N Spanish stock to Falmouth was conducted in 2021/2 and the species has very successfully taken to the site. This experiment was to investigate the degree of genetic similarity between the N Spanish population and the English populations.
Acknowledgment:
Data used on this website are adapted from Threatened species recovery actions 2025 baseline (JP065): Technical report and spreadsheet user guide (Natural England, 2025). Available here.