Chough (Pyrrhocorax pyrrhocorax)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > bird > Bird |
| Red List Status: | Vulnerable (Breeding) [VU(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: | Pyrrhocorax pyrrhocorax |
| 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: | Population that has naturally-colonised Cornwall is increasing - ongoing reintroduction project in Kent |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Population is still small and requires targeted habitat management to facilitate expansion into potentially suitable areas |
| 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: | If grazing and sward structure that Chough require takes place in suitable landscapes, but nesting habitat may be restricted by unsuitable geology or lack of appropriate man-made structures |
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: | Population monitoring in Cornwall volunteer led; nest/productivity monitoring less robust as population expands; no ringing currently undertaken. Some evidence that productivity is declining |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: To ensure that landscapes adjacent to existing Chough populations provide adequate nesting sites and foraging areas to allow future natural population expansion, consider and as appropriate implement recommendations of the 2016 SPA Review for this species.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Site protection
Duration: 6-10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: SW England, Kent
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Research chough diet, and prey populations at existing Chough foraging sites in England, to identify potential new sites that would facilitate range expansion, either natural or via translocation.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: SW England, Kent
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Reinstate productivity monitoring and ringing to assess whether a reduction in local productivity leads to density-dependent dispersal
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 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.