Common Toad (Bufo bufo)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > amphibian > Amphibian |
| Red List Status: | Near Threatened (Not Relevant) [NT(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: | Bufo bufo |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Linnaeus, 1758) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Foster et al., 2021 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | The species has experienced considerable declines in the last three decades, the causes of declines are not always clear; further research would be useful. Efforts are required to maintain and enhance existing populations, and to improve connectivity between populations. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Some generic actions would assist this species, but it also requires actions that address species-specific issues. The significance of the full range of possible decline factors is not well understood, and therefore the suite of recovery actions will need to remain under review. |
| 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: | Yes |
| Justification: | The species may benefit though likely to a minor extent. It would depend on precisely what action were taken, and in particular whether the action addressed any of the critical habitat requirements of this species. For example, it is likely untargeted works that result in suitable connected habitat such as ditches and mature hedgerows, with construction and/or restoration of large, deep ponds would benefit this species. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | SRC step is difficult to determine. Here Step 2 is given, using a conservative approach but some of the later steps are arguably partially met, and so the species might be anywhere between SRC Step 2 and Step 6. National monitoring and local recording schemes are largely unfunded and requires greater co-ordination. Possibly in connection with toad patrols, which are often organised by Froglife. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Substantial declines have been identified over recent decades, but the causes of those declines are not thoroughly understood. Undertake research to (a) determine the significance of the various potential factors behind recent declines, (b) understand potential threats that are likely to operate now and in the future, and (c) explore the appropriate conservation responses.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 6-10 years
Scale of Implementation: Not applicable
High priority sites: Inappropriate to suggest particular sites until the research methods are agreed. However, research sites will likely need to represent geographic and habitat variation. Possibly taking into account the potential effects of climate change.
Comments: Evidence suggests declines of the common toad vary by region, with the greatest declines identified in southern and eastern England. The level of declines is alarming for such a widespread species. Research should focus on teasing out the significance of the various potential decline factors, assessing whether they might apply in future, and explore the implications for conservation action. This could include but not limited to: habitat quality and connectivity, as well as pressures on critical life stages such as breeding migrations of adults, and metamorph migration from ponds. This could include further research on movements and vulnerability of metamorphs and juveniles. Also the effects of pesticides and other pollutants.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: As far as practicable, key areas for common toad to have targeted creation and management of habitat, both terrestrial and aquatic, with a particular emphasis to maintain or improve connectivity.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites: south and south-east England
Comments: Advice and support for farm advisors, NE advisors and farmers etc. to encourage targeted action in the key areas. Note the action is for advice (including written guidance, site visits, communications) and co-ordination. The species will require habitat management and creation; activity to include reversing fragmentation of habitats and improving connectivity between breeding ponds, foraging and hibernation areas. This could be expanded to the wider landscape (in addition to farmland) including advice for planners/developers relating to impacts of development and infrastructure development on fragmentation of toad migration routes, since these are frequently associated with visible/measurable toad mortality. Potential for road tunnels in important areas of toad migration.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Consider improving the coverage of common toad locations as interest features through SSSI designation, either as a single species feature or part of an amphibian assemblage feature.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Site protection
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: The recently revised guidelines for selection of SSSIs for amphibians and reptiles have identified that common toad qualify as a single species interest feature for SSSI notification, whereas previously the species could only be notified as part of a amphibian assemblage interest feature. The action would involve the development of a list of potential SSSIs for the species, or where this species is known to have declined.
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.