Great Crested Newt (Triturus cristatus)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > amphibian > Amphibian |
| Red List Status: | Least Concern (Not Relevant) [LC(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: | Triturus cristatus |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Laurenti, 1768) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Foster et al., 2021 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | Northern Great Crested Newt |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | The species has undergone considerable declines over the last century. It is considered conservation dependent in that its habitats require repeated intervention for populations to be maintained, for example breeding ponds require maintenance to keep them in suitable condition. Existing mechanisms for these actions are not reliably delivered by non-conservation means. There is a degree of ongoing population loss via various decline factors including development, agricultural activity and fish introduction. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Although some habitat creation and management actions would be helpful, generic actions would not address the recovery of this species thoroughly. For example, some actions relate to the specific habitat requirements of the species, or to its vulnerability to disease. |
| 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: | This species is likely to benefit from actions so long as they overlap with its general habitat requirements, and are located in appropriate areas. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 6. Recovery solutions trialled |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | There needs to be an over-arching strategy for monitoring this species. Various initiatives are happening, but more co-ordination is needed, and gaps is current provision need addressing. PondNet provides a baseline for 1km occupancy, and the National Amphibian Survey (NAS) once implemented will help with trend information. Significant information is being generated via District Level Licensing. Information needs to be better coordinated and collated. Major funding is linked to DLL, and this may affect what is delivered without appropriate reference to conservation need. The creation and monitoring of GCN in DLL-led operations must enhance GCN populations, but there are some areas where the scheme is not successful. It would be good to better understand precise requirements of GCN both during aquatic and terrestrial phases. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Farmland is a favoured habitat type for the great crested newt, and yet management is often not subject to bespoke advice, meaning farmland habitats are often in poor condition for this species. As far as practicable, key areas for great crested newts to have targeted creation of habitat to provide a connected landscape with ponds and suitable terrestrial habitat.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites: National, possibly focused in areas of greater losses, such as the south-east.
Comments: Advice and support for farm advisors, NE advisors and farmers etc to encourage the targeted action in the key areas. Note the action is for advice (including written guidance, site visits, communications) and co-ordination. Habitat creation, management and improving habitat connectivity (waterbodies including ponds and ditches, and terrestrial habitats) is required through land management and needs to be targeted to maximise conservation gains at the landscape level for the species.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Great crested newt populations outside of protected areas are more likely to be adversely affected by many of the threats and pressures acting on the species. Consider the potential for improving coverage of great crested newt locations, including the identification of exceptional colonies, as interest features through appropriate site designations.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Site protection
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: The recently revised SSSI selection guidelines provides greater guidance over boundary setting inter alia, to help to ensure sites provide sufficient terrestrial habitat etc for the species. The action would involve the development of a list of potential SSSIs for the species, and also existing SSSIs where the species could be added to the interest features for a site. This is an opportunity to increase the coverage of protected sites for the species, and to include a greater range of habitats used by the species. Ideally this action would also include other issues associated with SSSI procedures, such as revision of Favourable Condition Tables, site-specific management advice, and better mapping. Also more detailed surveys to establish the state colonies and if there are any significant declines.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Great crested newts appear to be particularly vulnerable to disease caused by a recently described pathogen, Batrachochytrium salamandrivorans (Bsal). As Bsal is present in captive animals in the UK, it is essential that urgent measures are put into place to protect wild great crested newts from this pathogen. An emergency plan is required to reduce the chance of disease emergence in the wild, to ensure surveillance, and to set up plans should an outbreak be detected.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: Not applicable
High priority sites:
Comments: This action involves two stages. The first is the urgent production and delivery of a plan to ensure essential measures are in place to minimise the risk of Bsal being spread from captive collections to the wild. The second stage is the development of a more detailed strategy on contingency plans should an outbreak be detected, for disease surveillance, and for any other steps to address the threat posed by emergence of this pathogen. Examples of good practice overseas are available as reference. Duration: The emergency plan is urgent and is required in the first year. The second stage is likely to take an additional two years. It is understood that some work on a Bsal strategy has been done, but it is unclear when this would be made public and whether it covers all appropriate themes.
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.