Goldeneye (Bucephala clangula)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > bird > Bird |
| Red List Status: | Vulnerable (Both Breeding & Non-breeding) [VU(br/nbr)] |
| 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: | Bucephala clangula |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Linnaeus, 1758) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Stanbury et al., 2021 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Rare breeder. Eng WeBS trends (25 yr -37%, 10 yr -20%) |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Promote species expansion via the provision of nest boxes. |
| 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: | Provision of deep water habitats for wintering population. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 5. Remedial action identified |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | May improve with reconvention of Goldeneye Study Group. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Provide Goldeneye suitable nest boxes in known and potential breeding habitat.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Special (in situ) measure
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Northumberland
Comments: Provide artificial nesting sites.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Monitor the population of the non-native invasive Mandarin in areas suitable for Goldeneye breeding.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Pressure mitigation
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Cumbria, Northumbria
Comments: Action to reduce competition for nest sites from INNS.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Consider and as appropriate implement the recommendations of SPA reviews for this species. This should include both outstanding actions from the 2001 SPA Review and additional recommendations of the 2016 SPA Review. Up to date evidence is also required.
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:
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.