Leistus montanus
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Ground beetle |
| Red List Status: | Endangered (Not Relevant) [EN(nr)] |
| 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: | Leistus montanus |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Stephens, 1827 |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Telfer, 2016 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Formerly recorded in North Wales, Cumbria, northwest and central Scotland and Ireland. With an ongoing decline in geographic range it is currently known at only one post-1980 location in England (last recorded on NBN in 2008). This ignores the 2016 Skiddaw summit record made as part of the Skiddaw invert CSM work. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | This extremely localised species (two known locations) is vulnerable to extinction in England. A targeted survey of the remaining location and neighbouring historical sites is required to determine which still support the species, followed by habitat management and site protection measures where necessary. The restriction of this extremely rare species to scree habitats suggests that broader habitat management measures would not be suitable. |
| 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: | This species would not benefit from untargeted management |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Extinction debt |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Found in dry situations among low stony lichen/Salix herbacea heath and scree on relatively steep, south facing and well-drained mountain soils. Generally at moderate to high altitudes although very occasionally at lowland situations. It tends to remain among debris under rocks or scree where it is difficult to find and thus potentially under-recorded. Taxonomically critical and easily misidentified by reference to L. spinibarbis, Does pitfall trap. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Undertake a targeted survey of current and historical sites during the peak seasons for adults in June to August and again in September and October to provide an updated status review. Pitfall trapping and hand searching in scree and stony dwarf summit heath are perhaps likely to be the best survey technique for this species.
Action targets: 2. Biological status assessment exists
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Langdale Pikes, Cumbria; Skiddaw Summit 2016 at type locality.
Comments: If existing locations remain in England then undertake actions 2 and 3.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Review historical and current management at existing locations in the UK and undertake literature reviews to characterise the range of micro-habitats within which it is found, in particular the nature of the debris under scree and boulder slopes, degree of slope and aspect. The reviews should help Identify the management requirements of optimal scree and rocky habitats, as well as the pressures from over-grazing and climate change (e.g. increased temperatures) which might prevent recovery.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: 1 site
High priority sites: Langdale Pikes, Cumbria and neighbouring locations with potentially suitable habitat.
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Employ information on suitable habitat conditions to locate potential recipient locations where the species might be introduced/re-introduced, depending on the viability of potential donor populations at any existing locations and the probability that declines result from climate change effects which cannot be mitigated. Consider ecological requirements of the species, suitability of site, timing of release and the need for ongoing habitat management. No information could be found on the feasibility of re-introducing this species nor the techniques necessary for success.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Langdale Pikes area and extensions to the Skiddaw massif.
Comments: Given the nature of the habitat and the probable influence of climatic changes (increased warming in montane areas) it seems unlikely that any practical management measures will be available to restore this species.
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.