Short-snouted Seahorse (Hippocampus hippocampus)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > bony fish (Actinopterygii) > Fish |
| Red List Status: | (Not Relevant) [(not listed)(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | (none) |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Hippocampus hippocampus |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Linnaeus, 1758) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | (not listed) |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Not Red List assessed at GB or England scales but re-assessed as Data Deficient in global and European Red Lists. Commonly found in estuaries, marinas, ports and various deep and shallow water habitats which are all highly sensitive to habitat degradation, pollution climate change and other human impacts. S41 and scheduled protection under WCA. Also listed in Appendix II of CITES, OSPAR, European CITES, and Bern Convention. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Habitat Suitability Modelling for the species exists, although there is a need for survey, monitoring and research to evidence current distribution and population status in England. Further research is needed to establish water quality parameters of the species, and to inform actions required to conserve the species and its sediment 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: | No |
| Justification: | Not applicable |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Policy conflict (detail in comments) |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Policy conflicts: Habitat loss and degradation, fisheries impact, coastal development e.g. power stations |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Determine current population & distribution in English waters and assess its GB Red List status. Currently listed as Data Deficient in IUCN global assessment.
Action targets: 2. Biological status assessment exists
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites: Southern and east coast of England
Comments: A Species Recovery Project in Sussex has been proposed. Encourage submission of observations to seahorses@naturalengland.org.uk and share data with the Marine Management Organisation. Significant challenges exist to combine citizen science and surveying for seahorses, including health and safety regulations. Monitoring is taking place by NGOs, but data are not openly available for IUCN assessment. Monitoring / available evidence is currently limited to opportunistic data.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Establish a scheme to monitor trends in abundance and related condition of habitat at key locations, based on areas for life history stages such as breeding and feeding. Monitoring tools could be developed using eDNA and / or acoustics. Use data to inform management at key sites.
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites: Southern and east coast of England
Comments: Priority sites are already identified and protected to some extent - 4 MCZs for this species. Species features have limited monitoring within MCZs; data gathered by external NGOs are not available for assessments.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Incidental bycatch of short snouted seahorse takes place in some shallow-water fisheries targeting other species. Spatio-temporal management could be considered to further minimise bycatch (e.g. avoidance of some fishing grounds or times of the year where there is a spatial overlap between the target species of the fisheries and seahorses. However, there is very limited information on this incidental capture and so is not adequate to frame such measures at present, therefore more research on this is needed into the potential interactions.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites: 4 MCZs and Sussex / Solent areas
Comments: Whilst reducing fishing pressures and site protection are key, they are best assessed in conjunction with other drivers e.g. climate change and seabed carbon stores. A lack of reported sightings means that outside known habitats such as seagrass beds, evidence of areas frequented by seahorses has lower confidence. Advice to fishers on returning seahorses safely to sea may be beneficial, though does not achieve protection of the holdfasts/habitat.
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.