Snipe (Gallinago gallinago)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > bird > Bird |
| Red List Status: | Least Concern (Breeding) / Vulnerable (Non-breeding) [LC(br) VU(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: | Gallinago gallinago |
| 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: | Breeding numbers increasing Eng BBS (25 yr non signif +27%, 10 yr signif +50%). Eng WeBS trends (25 yr -43%, 10 yr -18%). |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Wintering population is widespread across many habitats. |
| 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: | Creation and management of network of suitable fresh water wetlands with shallow edges in the wintering range. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Structured - sufficient |
| Species Comments: | Notoriously difficult to survey. Our understanding of the impacts of hunting on this species are constrained by the lack of a robust hunting bag reporting system (including data collection). |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Consider and as appropriate implement the recommendations of the 2016 SPA Review for this species. Up to date evidence is required.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Site protection
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites: Ouse Washes which has lost almost all its breeding snipe and is one of the few places in lowland England that is notified as breeding site
Comments: Action should be to promote habitat creation
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Deploy management interventions (supported by advice) to improve nest and chick survival though e.g., sward management, stocking levels, site hydrology, at a sufficient scale.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites: Fens/fenland washes
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.