Common Tern (Sterna hirundo)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > bird > Bird |
| Red List Status: | Near Threatened (Breeding) [NT(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: | Sterna hirundo |
| 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: | Long term non-significant population increase Eng BBS (25 yr +66%, 10 yr +22%). Seabirds Count is better scheme - showed 3% decline since S2000 but significant HPAI impacts since |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | major HPAI impacts. |
| 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: | potentially if suitable disturbance free areas of habitat can be created around the coast. Also through the provision of nesting rafts and islands within inland wetland complexes. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Structured - sufficient |
| Species Comments: |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Manage most important current sites in optimum condition by taking into account predation, disturbance, biosecurity/disease management, nesting habitats and species competition. Monitor population and productivity in response to interventions and adapt management accordingly.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Coquet, Farnes, Saltholme, N Norfolk, Breydon, Thames/Medway, Dungeness/Rye, Solent, Seaforth, Ribble, Hodbarrow.
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Provide new opportunities for breeding (including through provision of rafts) at both coastal sites and inland wetlands through habitat creation, and consider SPA Review recommendations.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Habitat creation
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Essex, Thames, Solent, Inland
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Review of trends and productivity of inland population, including use of rafts. Revise strategy and advice accordingly.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Special (in situ) measure
Duration: 1 year
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.