Ruff (Calidris pugnax)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > bird > Bird |
| Red List Status: | Endangered (Non-breeding) / Critically Endangered (Breeding) [EN(nbr) CR(br)] |
| 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: | Calidris pugnax |
| 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: | Very rare breeder. Eng WeBS trends (25 yr -34%, 10 yr +8%) |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Potential to establish new breeding population. |
| 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: | Could benefit ruff if provide the right wet grasslands within wetland habitat mosaic. Habitat availability not limiting at present. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 5. Remedial action identified |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Pressures acting outside England |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - sufficient |
| Species Comments: | European range declining in west. Declines extinctions in near continent. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Target suitable areas, e.g. Fenland and NW England, to create and appropriately manage wet grassland and saltmarsh with appropriate monitoring of nesting attempts.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: 6-10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Fens, North Norfolk, NW England and SE Lincs
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Consider and as appropriate implement the recommendations of the 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: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Investigate the feasibility and potential role of conservation translocation (including reintroduction, headstarting) to support species recovery.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: Not applicable
High priority sites: Fens, North Norfolk and SE Lincs
Comments: There is at least one ongoing/planned reintroduction project in England.
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.