Abstract The Ramsar Convention requires signatory countries to describe, ‘at the time of listing’, the ecological character of wetlands nominated as internationally important. It also requires nations to maintain the ecological character. While the definition of ecological character by the Convention, is ‘the combination of the ecosystem components, processes and benefits/services that characterize the wetland at any given point in time’ it has been misinterpreted that the wetland needs to be maintained in the condition observed at the time the site was listed . As the Convention was established, in 1971, with the purpose of arresting the loss and degradation of wetlands, it stands that many wetlands were degraded when the convention was signed, and even more so when sites were listed. Adherence to a time-of-listing baseline precludes options to restore wetlands to a previous state. It also runs contrary to the Guidelines for Ecological Restoration which advocate for an appropriate indigenous baseline as a target. There is provision in the Convention to revise the target character if evidence of a different baseline becomes available. This was applied in the case of Chilika Lagoon (India) where the lagoon was opened to the sea to recover a brackish past state. In the Gippsland Lakes (Australia) it is recognised that an artificial opening to the ocean has changed the character yet management pursues the state described at the time of listing. Historical and palaeoecological evidence can provide a means to identify a raft of indigenous states that may be more appropriate targets for management.