Natterjack Toad (Epidalea calamita)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > amphibian > Amphibian |
| Red List Status: | Endangered (Not Relevant) [EN(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: | Epidalea calamita |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Laurenti, 1768) |
| 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: | This species is considered to have undergone a significant reduction in range and abundance over the last century. Efforts are required to maintain and enhance existing populations, and to restore the range. The species is considered conservation dependent in that it lives predominantly in lowland heathland, coastal sand dunes and upper saltmarsh, with particular habitat conditions that require ongoing intervention. |
| 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. In particular, there are issues relating to the maintenance of breeding and foraging habitat that may not be addressed unless species-specific action is taken. |
| 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: | Possibly, but it depends on precisely what is done, and there is a risk that such actions could be detrimental. This is because the species requires pioneer habitats, and efforts to increase the structural diversity (e.g. increase scrub levels) could reduce habitat suitability. If untargeted habitat management is to take place on sites supporting this species, it should seek to create or maintain open conditions. Targeted actions are necessary in the creation of bare ground, open sandy habitats for foraging. Shallow ephemeral breeding pools also require targeted management. Natterjacks tend to use newly created or recently restored breeding pools and long standing pools are often ignored. Therefore an ongoing regime of pond management is crucial. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 6. Recovery solutions trialled |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Structured - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | The natterjack toad national monitoring programme falls under the National Amphibian and Reptile Monitoring Programme. Further investment and collaboration is warranted. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Artificially elevated levels of habitat succession and fixation are known to be a fundamental problem for natterjack toad conservation. Restore dynamic processes to maintain early successional habitat, targeted to priority sites in key areas.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Whole of Sefton coast - particularly Ainsdale NNR. Cumbrian coast including Drigg, Haverigg and Sandscale Haws, Roanhead. Also lowland heathland sites in the south east and east Anglia, where Natterjacks have almost entirely disappeared. The restoration of inland sites is important to balance the potential loss of coastal sites due to rising sea levels and more frequent storms associated with the effects of climate change. However, these need careful consideration to ensure small isolated populations are not created. Harper and Foster (2024) is a useful resource for determining whether a translocation is suitable.
Comments: The action is to be focused on sand dunes and heathland. Sand dunes: The work will include mobilising fixed dunes by creating notches in the frontal dunes, scraping back turf, grazing (including no fence grazing) etc. Regions: NW England and East Anglia. Heathland: Southern England. The rationale for action could have important implications for suggesting sites i.e. based on immediate threat, recovery potential, increasing resilience etc. Possibly look at historic sites where the species has disappeared, try to establish the causes for loss and to restore these sites, with potential translocation. Also consider other non-historic sites which have potential such as disused industrial sites (quarries etc) could have important implications for suggesting sites, or where the species has disappeared, try to establish the causes for loss and to restore these sites, with potential translocation.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Creation of habitat at existing and new sites, with suitable follow-up management such as grazing, to be implemented at all sites where necessary for this species
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites: North west coast, east Anglia and SE heathlands.
Comments: Note the action is for advice (including written guidance, site visits, communications) and co-ordination. Key habitat for natterjack toads includes ephemeral (more or less unvegetated) pools, short sward vegetation and considerable extent of bare ground.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: The species has lost substantial range over the last century. Establish additional populations and restore the range by translocation to new sites from a reintroduction programme. This to involve production of a strategic reintroduction plan, co-ordination of translocation programme, identification of additional sites to establish additional populations, appropriate habitat restoration, etc. to ensure compliance with good practice in conservation translocations.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Identification of translocation sites would be part of the strategy and feasibility work. There is a range of candidate reintroduction sites that require further assessment.
Comments: The project would need to investigate a range of issues including assessment of heathland waterbody suitability, and methods for ensuring continued habitat management. This could be the Weald (Surrey, Hants, Sussex), and reintroductions are also potentially feasible elsewhere in the range, though more evaluation is needed to ensure translocations proceed according to good practice. Please note this action is difficult to cost and difficult to know the scale of implementation expected/required. There has been an 80% decline in the species since the beginning of the 20th century . The combination of climate change, coastal squeeze and habitat degradation is likely to seriously threaten the English range of natterjack toads. Anthropogenic pressures have weakened the adaptive capacity of the species leaving it in a perilous position to new pressures caused by climate change. It is likely that without action, the current coastal range of the population will contract.
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.