Limosa limosa -- (Linnaeus, 1758)ANIMALIA -- CHORDATA -- AVES -- CHARADRIIFORMES -- SCOLOPACIDAECommon names: Black-tailed Godwit; Barge à queue noire

European Red List AssessmentEuropean Red List Status

VU -- Vulnerable, (IUCN version 3.1)

Assessment InformationYear published: 2015Date assessed: 2015-03-31Assessor(s): BirdLife InternationalReviewer(s): Symes, A.Compiler(s): Ashpole, J., Burfield, I., Ieronymidou, C., Pople, R., Wheatley, H. & Wright, L.Assessment RationaleEuropean regional assessment: Vulnerable (VU)EU27 regional assessment: Endangered (EN)

This godwit has undergone rapid declines in Europe owing to changes in agricultural practices and is therefore classified as Vulnerable (A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde).

Within the EU27 declines have been more rapid and it is classified as Endangered (A2abcde+3bcde+4abcde).

OccurrenceCountries/Territories of OccurrenceNative:Albania; Armenia; Austria; Azerbaijan; Belarus; Belgium; Bosnia and Herzegovina; Bulgaria; Croatia; Cyprus; Czech Republic; Denmark; Faroe Islands (to DK); Estonia; Finland; France; Georgia; Germany; Greece; Hungary; Iceland; Ireland, Rep. of; Italy; Latvia; Liechtenstein; Lithuania; Luxembourg; Macedonia, the former Yugoslav Republic of; Malta; Moldova; Montenegro; Netherlands; Norway; Poland; Portugal; Romania; Russian Federation; Serbia; Slovakia; Slovenia; Spain; Sweden; Switzerland; Turkey; Ukraine; United Kingdom; Gibraltar (to UK)Origin Uncertain:AndorraVagrant:Greenland (to DK); Svalbard and Jan Mayen (to NO)

PopulationThe European population is estimated at 102,000-149,000 pairs, which equates to 205,000-298,000 mature individuals. The population in the EU27 is estimated at 43,400-70,300 pairs, which equates to 86,800-141,000 mature individuals. For details of national estimates, see Supplementary PDF.

TrendIn Europe the population size is estimated to be decreasing by 30-49% in 25.8 years (three generations). In the EU27 the population size is estimated to be decreasing by 50-79% in the same period. For details of national estimates, see Supplementary PDF.

Habitats and EcologyIn its breeding range this species mostly inhabits areas with high grass and soft soil (Johnsgard 1981, Van Gils et al. 2014). Its preferred habitats include cattle pastures, hayfields (Johnsgard 1981), lowland wet grasslands, grassy marshland, raised bogs and moorland, lake margins and damp grassy depressions in steppes (Van Gils et al. 2014). Extensive farmland habitats are of critical importance for breeding populations in western European. In its non-breeding range, it inhabits wet damp areas around fish-ponds and sewage farms, tidal marshes, mud flats and salt-water lagoons (Cramp et al. 1983, Tucker and Heath 1994). Subspecies limosa tends to winter in freshwater habitats. Subspecies islandica, while it frequents staging sites

at inland wetlands and flooded grasslands in the Netherlands, it often winters in brackish habitats (Van Gils et al. 2014). Despite these general differences there is considerable overlap in wintering habitat between populations of subspecies limosa and islandica (Various 2007). It breeds from April to mid-June in loose, semi-colonial groups (Gunnarsson et al. 2006). The nest is placed on the ground in short, often luxuriant vegetation (Johnsgard 1981, Cramp et al. 1983, Van Gils et al. 2014). It consists of a shallow scrape 12–15 cm in diameter, lined with a thick mat of stem grass, leaves and other available vegetation (Cramp et al. 1983). Clutch size is normally four (Van Gils et al. 2014). Its diet consists of adult and larval insects, annelid and polychaete worms, molluscs, ragworms, crustaceans, spiders, fish eggs, and the spawn and tadpoles of frogs (Johnsgard 1981, Van Gils et al. 2014). Particularly during the winter and on migration it will also take plant material including berries, seeds and rice grains (Cramp et al. 1983, Van Gils et al. 2014). This species is highly gregarious and migrates on a broad front, making long-distance flights, often overland between relatively few staging and wintering areas. The species migrates southwards between late-June and October (Van Gils et al. 2014). The eastern Atlantic flyway population has important staging areas on the Iberian peninsula and winters in western Africa.Habitats & Altitude

Habitat (level 1 - level 2) Importance OccurrenceArtificial/Aquatic - Aquaculture Ponds suitable non-breedingArtificial/Aquatic - Wastewater Treatment Areas suitable non-breedingArtificial/Terrestrial - Arable Land suitable non-breedingArtificial/Terrestrial - Pastureland major breedingGrassland - Temperate major breedingMarine Intertidal - Mud Flats and Salt Flats major non-breedingMarine Intertidal - Salt Marshes (Emergent Grasses) suitable non-breedingMarine Neritic - Estuaries major non-breedingWetlands (inland) - Bogs, Marshes, Swamps, Fens, Peatlands suitable breedingWetlands (inland) - Bogs, Marshes, Swamps, Fens, Peatlands suitable non-breedingWetlands (inland) - Seasonal/Intermittent Freshwater Lakes (over ha) suitable non-breedingWetlands (inland) - Seasonal/Intermittent Freshwater Marshes/Pools (under ha) suitable non-breedingAltitude Occasional altitudinal limits

ThreatsLoss of nesting habitat owing to wetland drainage and agricultural intensification, and conversely, abandonment, are the most significant threats (Kentie et al. 2013). Detrimental activities include the conversion of wet meadows to arable land, increased fertilisation and drainage of grassland (Roodbergen and Teunissen 2014), artificial flooding of nesting habitats, earlier and more frequent mowing as farmers adapt to earlier springs, spring burning, overgrowing by scrub, land claiming by businesses and developers, the construction of roads and parks, and disturbance by walkers (Tucker and Heath 1994, A. van Dijk in litt. 2005, A. Mischenko in litt. 2007, Hayhow 2008, Oomen 2008, Holm and Laursen 2009, Kleijn et al. 2010, Kentie et al. 2013). Increasing populations of predators to possibly unnatural levels is a significant cause of mortality in the Netherlands, exacerbated by intensive farming reducing available cover for the species (Schekkerman et al. 2009). In some areas, grassland turnover from 'natural, flower-rich, diverse and wet' to sillage monoculture leads to a loss of nests with eggs and chicks due to mowing and starvation of chicks due to a lack of food (Schekkerman and Beintema 2007). Habitat fragmentation may cause particular problems for this species, which nests in dispersed colonies and sub-colonies as protection against predators and may be unlikely to breed successfully in small areas of habitat. The planned development of a new airport near Lisbon is likely to have negative implications on an important site for migratory birds (Gill et al. 2007, Masero et al. 2011). Hunting has been another significant threat, although France has now followed the rest of the EU in implementing a five-year ban on hunting of the species, beginning in 2008 (I. Burfield in litt. 2008) which was extended in 2013 for a further five years. Outside the EU, hunting is known to occur but its scale and impact are unknown. Water pollution is probably an issue in parts of the species's range (H. Hötker in litt. 2005), and drought in the West African wintering quarters may have had negative impacts on the mainland European population (Tucker and Heath 1994). The Icelandic population is potentially at risk from the policy of the Icelandic government to encourage afforestation of the lowland habitats where they breed (S. Nagy in litt. 2005). Threats on migration include pollution, human disturbance, habitat reclamation for tidal energy plants, aquaculture ponds, land conversion for agriculture and urban expansion. A study in the Netherlands suggests that climate change has driven an advance in agricultural activities to the detriment of this species (Kleijn et al. 2010). Juvenile birds which select good wintering sites also select good breeding sites

(Gunnarsson et al. 2005), therefore maintaining high quality wintering sites is crucial to raising productivity on breeding grounds and slowing the rate of decline. There is a marked decrease in the density of breeding birds near to roads, particularly those with heavy traffic (van der Zande et al. 1980, Reijnen et al. 1996). Natal philopatry means that a decrease in local recruitment could prove catastrophic for individual breeding sites (Kruk et al. 1998). A recent study shows that recruiters from good quality habitats disperse to low quality habitats that act as sinks and so these individuals are considered 'lost' to the population. This has repercussions for the effectiveness of agri-environment measures (Kentie 2015).Threats & Impacts

Threat (level 1) Threat (level 2) Impact and StressesAgriculture & aquaculture

Agro-industry farming

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Majority (50-90%) Slow, Significant

DeclinesMedium Impact

StressesEcosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation

Agriculture & aquaculture

Agro-industry grazing, ranching or farming

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Majority (50-90%) Slow, Significant

DeclinesMedium Impact

StressesEcosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation

Agriculture & aquaculture

Industrial aquaculture

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Slow, Significant

DeclinesLow Impact

StressesEcosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation

Agriculture & aquaculture

Livestock farming & ranching (scale unknown/unrecorded)

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Slow, Significant

DeclinesLow Impact

StressesEcosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation; Species disturbance; Reduced reproductive success

Agriculture & aquaculture

Wood & pulp plantations (scale unknown/unrecorded)

Timing Scope Severity ImpactFuture Minority (<50%) Rapid Declines Low Impact

StressesEcosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation

Biological resource use

Hunting & trapping terrestrial animals (intentional use - species is the target)

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Rapid Declines Medium Impact

StressesSpecies mortality

Climate change & severe weather

Habitat shifting & alteration

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Slow, Significant

DeclinesLow Impact

StressesIndirect ecosystem effects

Energy production & mining

Renewable energy Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Causing/Could

cause fluctuationsLow Impact

StressesEcosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation

Human intrusions & disturbance

Work & other activities

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Unknown Causing/Could

cause fluctuationsUnknown

StressesSpecies disturbance

Invasive and other problematic species, genes & diseases

Ermine (Mustela erminea)

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Causing/Could

cause fluctuationsLow Impact

StressesSpecies mortality

Threats & ImpactsThreat (level 1) Threat (level 2) Impact and Stresses

Invasive and other problematic species, genes & diseases

Least Weasel (Mustela nivalis)

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Causing/Could

cause fluctuationsLow Impact

StressesSpecies mortality

Natural system modifications

Abstraction of ground water (unknown use)

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Slow, Significant

DeclinesLow Impact

StressesEcosystem degradation; Indirect ecosystem effects

Natural system modifications

Abstraction of surface water (unknown use)

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Slow, Significant

DeclinesLow Impact

StressesEcosystem degradation

Natural system modifications

Increase in fire frequency/intensity

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Slow, Significant

DeclinesLow Impact

StressesEcosystem degradation; Reduced reproductive success

Pollution Industrial & military effluents (type unknown/unrecorded)

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Slow, Significant

DeclinesLow Impact

StressesEcosystem degradation

Residential & commercial development

Commercial & industrial areas

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Causing/Could

cause fluctuationsLow Impact

StressesEcosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation

Residential & commercial development

Housing & urban areas

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Slow, Significant

DeclinesLow Impact

StressesEcosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation

Residential & commercial development

Tourism & recreation areas

Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Causing/Could

cause fluctuationsLow Impact

StressesEcosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation

Transportation & service corridors

Flight paths Timing Scope Severity ImpactFuture Minority (<50%) Rapid Declines Low Impact

StressesEcosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation; Species mortality

Transportation & service corridors

Roads & railroads Timing Scope Severity ImpactOngoing Minority (<50%) Causing/Could

cause fluctuationsLow Impact

StressesEcosystem conversion; Ecosystem degradation; Species mortality; Species disturbance

ConservationConservation Actions UnderwayEU Birds Directive Annex II. An EU management plan for 2007-2009 was adopted, and an AEWA action plan replaced it at the end of 2008 (Anon. 2008). Intensive management of breeding habitat has been carried out in some western European countries (H. Hötker in litt. 2005, Roodbergen & Teunissen 2014), and a number of agri-environment schemes focus on this species, although results have been mixed (Musters et al. 2001, S. Nagy in litt. 2005, Breeuwer et al. 2007, A. Mischenko in litt. 2007, Verhulst et al. 2007). It occurs

in a number of protected areas.

Conservation Actions ProposedObtain more quantitative data on status, population trends and conservation requirements outside of Europe. Critically evaluate the effectiveness of current conservation action. In the EU, use a mixture of agri-environment schemes, direct payments to wader-friendly farmers (Musters et al. 2001) and large reserves to secure protection and appropriate management of breeding habitat; the coverage of agri-environment schemes in Europe should be increased (Kleijn et al. 2010) and increases in groundwater depth should be prioritised as an outcome (Verhulst et al. 2007). Establish nature reserves on important breeding sites throughout the species's range. Manage existing reserves appropriately: prescriptions include avoiding drainage of existing wet meadows, raising water tables where necessary, low-level use of organic fertiliser, low intensity grazing, late mowing, and prevention of succession to bushy vegetation; winter flooding is sometimes recommended but may reduce numbers of invertebrate prey (Gunnarsson et al. 2005). Ensure that migratory staging posts and winter feeding habitats and roosts are conserved and monitored, and knowledge of them is improved (Estrella and Masero 2010). Designate a Special Protection Area around Extremadura's rice fields, which is a key stopover site (Masero et al. 2011). Manage artificial habitats appropriately, e.g. maintain low water levels in salinas such so that they are available to foraging godwits (Estrella and Masero 2010), and block drainage to retain water in Iberian rice fields (Lourenço and Piersma 2008). Engage with governments and local people throughout its migration routes. Effectively enforce the EU-wide ban on hunting until there is clear evidence that the population has returned to a favourable conservation status. Safeguard habitats in Iberia, perhaps by offering support to rice producers (Gill et al. 2007). Collaborate with farmers and hunters, carrying out environmental education and outreach work where appropriate. Prevent afforestation of lowland breeding habitat in Iceland. Prevent a loss of key breeding areas due to abandonment of grasslands and meadows in eastern Europe. Monitor human disturbance as a threat. Ensure recognition as a protected animal throughout range (Hancock 2008).

BibliographyAnon. 2008. New action plans for the Black-tailed Godwit and the Eurasian Spoonbill. AEWA Newsletter: 11.Cramp, S.; Simmons, K. E. L. 1983. Handbook of the birds of Europe, the Middle East and Africa. The birds of the western Palearctic vol. III: waders to gulls. Oxford University Press, Oxford.Estrella, S. M.; Masero, J. A. 2010. Prey and prey size selection by the Near-threatened Black-tailed Godwit foraging in non-tidal areas during migration. Waterbirds 33(3): 293-299.Gill, J. A.; Langston, R. H. W.; Alves, J. A.; Atkinson, P. W.; Bocher, P.; Vieria, N. C.; Crockford, N. J.; Gélinaud, G.; Groen, N.; Gunnarsson, T. G.; Hayhow, B.; Hooijmeijer, J.; Kentie, R.; Kleijn, D.; Lourenco, P. M.; Masero, J. A.; Meunier, F. 2007. Contrasting trends in two Black-tailed Godwit populations: a review of causes and recommendations. Wader Study Group Bulletin: 43-50.Gunnarsson, T. G.; Gill, J. A.; Appleton, G. F.; Gíslason,H.; Gardarsson, A.; Watkinson, A. R.; W.J. Sutherland, W. J. 2006. Large-scale habitat associations of birds in lowland Iceland: Implications for conservation. Biological Conservation 128: 265-275.Gunnarsson, T. G.; Gill, J. A.; Newton, J.; Potts, P.M.; Sutherland, W.J. 2005. Seasonal matching of habitat quality and fitness in migratory birds. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London Series B 272: 2319-2323.Hayhow, B. 2008. Food for the gods. I-Webs News: 2.Holm, T. E.; Laursen, K. 2009. Experimental disturbance by walkers affects behaviour and territory density of nesting Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa. Ibis 151(1): 77-87.Johnsgard, P. A. 1981. The plovers, sandpipers and snipes of the world. University of Nebraska Press, Lincoln, U.S.A. and London.Kentie, R., Duijns, S., Seijger, C., Booij, P., Sjollema, S., van Loon, J., Saraiva, S. & van Klink, R. (2015). Spatial demography of black-tailed godwits: metapopulation dynamics in a fragmented agricultural landscape. University of Groningen.Kentie, R., Hooijmeijer, J. C., Trimbos, K. B., Groen, N. M., & Piersma, T. (2013). Intensified agricultural use of grasslands reduces growth and survival of precocial shorebird chicks. Journal of Applied Ecology, 50(1), 243-251.Kleijn, D., Schekkerman, H., Dimmers, W. J., Van Kats, R. J., Melman, D., & Teunissen, W. A. (2010). Adverse effects of agricultural intensification and climate change on breeding habitat quality of Black‐tailed Godwits Limosa l. limosa in the Netherlands. Ibis, 152(3), 475-486.

BibliographyKleijn, D.; Schekkerman, H.; Dimmers, W. J.; Van Kats, R. J.. M.; Melman, D.; Teunissen, W. A. 2010. Adverse effects of agricultural intensification and climate change on breeding habitat quality of Black-tailed Godwits Limosa l. limosa in the Netherlands. Ibis 152: 475-486.Kruk, M., Noordervliet, M.A.W. and Ter Keurs, W.J. 1998. Natal philopatry in the black-tailed godwit Limosa limosa l. and its possible implications for conservation. Ringing and Migration 19(1): 13-16.Lourenço, P. M.; Piersma, T. 2008. Stopover ecology of Black-tailed Godwits Limosa limosa limosa in Portugese rice fields: a guide on where to feed in winter. Bird Study 55(2): 194-202. Hancock, P. 2008. Black-tailed Godwit. In: Hancock, P. (ed.), The status of globally and nationally threatened birds in Botswana, 2008., pp. 25. BirdLife Botswana.Masero, J. A.; Santiago-Queseda, F.; Sámchez-Guzmán, J. M.; Villegas, A.; Abad-Gómez, J. M.; Lopes, R. J.; Encarnação, V.; Corbacho, C.; Morán, R. 2011. Long lengths of stay, large numbers, and trends of the Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa in rice fields during spring migration. Bird Conservation International 21(1): 12-24.Musters, C.J.M., Kruk, M., De Graaf, H.J. and Ter Keurs, W.J. 2001. Breeding birds as a farm product. Conservation Biology 15(2): 363-369.Oomen, P. 2008. Save the king! Alula 14(1): 22-29.Oosterveld, E. B.; Van Lierop, S.; Sikkema, M. 2009. Use of unfertilised margins on intensively managed grassland by Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa and Redshank Tringa totanus chicks. Wader Study Group Bulletin 116(2): 69-74.Reijnen, R., Foppen, R., Meeuwsen, H. 1996. The effects of traffic on the density of breeding birds in Dutch agricultural grasslands . Biological Conservation 75(3): 255-260.Roodbergen, M & W. Teunissen. 2014. Meadow bird conservation in The Netherlands-lessons from tha past and future developments. Vogelwelt 135: 29-34.Schekkerman, H.; Teunissen, W.; Oosterveld, E. 2009. Mortality of Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa and Northern Lapwing Vanellus vanellus chicks in wet grasslands: influence of predation and agriculture. Journal of Ornithology 150(1): 133-145.Triplet, P.; Mahéo, R.; Le Dréan-Quénec'dhu, S. 2007. La Barge à Queue Noire Limosa limosa islandica hivernant en France - Littoral Manche-Atlantique, 1977-2006. Alauda 75(4): 389-398.Tucker, G.M. & Heath, M.F. (1994) Birds in Europe: their conservation status. Cambridge, UK: BirdLife International (BirdLife Conservation Series no. 3).Van der Zande, A. N., Ter Keurs, J. & Van der Weijden, W. J. 1980. The impact of roads on the densities of four bird species in an open field habitat -- evidence of a long distance effect. Biol. Conserv. 18: 299-321.Van Gils, J., Wiersma, P. & Christie, D.A. (2014). Black-tailed Godwit (Limosa limosa). In: del Hoyo, J., Elliott, A., Sargatal, J., Christie, D.A. & de Juana, E. (eds.) (2014). Handbook of the Birds of the World Alive. Lynx Edicions, Barcelona. (retrieved from http://www.hbw.com/node/53888 on 19 January 2015).Various. 2007. Workshop on the conservation of the Black-tailed Godwit populations of NW Europe [Abstracts]. Wader Study Group Bulletin: 12-16.Verhulst, J., Kleijn, D., Berendse, F. 2007. Direct and indirect effects of the most widely implemented Dutch agri-environment schemes on breeding waders. J. Appl. Ecol. 44: 70-80.

Map (see overleaf)