• Summary
• Text account
• Data table and detailed info
• Map
• Reference and further resources

The site was identified as internationally important for bird conservation in 2000 because it was regularly supporting significant populations of the species listed below, meeting ('triggering') IBA criteria.

Populations meeting IBA criteria ('trigger species') at the site:

Species	Red List	Season (year/s of estimate)	Size	IBA criteria
Tundra Swan Cygnus columbianus	LC	non-breeding (1994)	1,091 birds	A4i, B1i, B2, C2, C6
Pink-footed Goose Anser brachyrhynchus	LC	non-breeding (1994)	8,000 birds	A4i, B1i, C3
Common Teal Anas crecca	LC	non-breeding (1994)	6,900 birds	B1i, C3
Eurasian Bittern Botaurus stellaris	LC	breeding (1994)	10 pairs	B2, C6
Great Cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo	LC	breeding (1994)	1,000 pairs	B1i, C3
Pied Avocet Recurvirostra avosetta	LC	breeding (1994)	592–670 pairs	A4i, B1i, B3, C2, C6
Bar-tailed Godwit Limosa lapponica	NT	passage (-)	1,000 birds	A4i, B1i, C2
Black-tailed Godwit Limosa limosa	NT	breeding (1994)	266–272 pairs	B2
Common Redshank Tringa totanus	LC	breeding (1992)	530 pairs	B2
Sandwich Tern Thalasseus sandvicensis	LC	breeding (1996)	1,024 pairs	A4i, B1i, B2, C2, C6
A4iii Species group - waterbirds	n/a	unknown (1994)	20,000-49,999 birds	A4iii, C4

Ideally the conservation status of the IBA will have been checked regularly since the site was first identified in 2000. The most recent assessment (2019) is shown below.

Pressure (threats to the trigger species and/or their habitats)
Threat	Timing	Scope	Severity	Result
Pollution	happe­ning now	whole of popul­ation/area (>90%)	moderate decline (10–30% over 3 gener­ations)	very high
Invasive and other problematic species and genes	happe­ning now	some of popul­ation/area (10–49%)	moderate decline (10–30% over 3 gener­ations)	high
Natural system modifications	happe­ning now	some of popul­ation/area (10–49%)	slow decline (1–10% over 3 gener­ations)	medium

Response (conservation actions taken for the trigger species and/or their habitats)
Designation	Planning	Action	Result
Whole area (>90%) covered by appropriate conservation designation	No management plan exists, but the management planning process has begun	Some limited conservation initiatives are in place	not assessed

Year	Protected Area	Designation (management category)	% coverage of IBA
1947	Nymindestrøm	Fredet ved afgørelse, exl. Kirkeomgivelser (IV)	1
1992	Ringkøbing-Skjern Kommune	§3 beskyttet natur (alle søer, moser, vandløb, heder, enge mv) (IV)	2
1992	Varde Kommune	§3 beskyttet natur (alle søer, moser, vandløb, heder, enge mv) (IV)	1
2004	Værnengene	Fredet ved afgørelse, exl. Kirkeomgivelser (IV)	12
2009	Ringkøbing Fjord og Nymindestrømmen	Marine Protected Area (OSPAR) (UA)	<1

Habitat	% of IBA	Habitat detail
Grassland	5	Humid grasslands
Marine Coastal/Supratidal	major (>10)
Marine Intertidal	major (>10)
Marine Neritic	minor (<10)
Wetlands (inland)	minor (<10)	Water fringe vegetation

Land use	% of IBA
unknown	90
agriculture	10

---

Recommended citation
BirdLife International (2024) Important Bird Area factsheet: Ringkøbing Fjord (Denmark). Downloaded from https://datazone.birdlife.org/site/factsheet/ringkøbing-fjord-iba-denmark on 23/12/2024.