Bledius occidentalis
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Rove beetle (macrostaph) |
| Red List Status: | Vulnerable (Not Relevant) [VU(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: | Bledius occidentalis |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Bondroit, 1907 |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Boyce, 2022 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | All post-79 sites for B. occidentalis are in the Rye and Camber area (East Sussex, vc14), except for a single record from Reading, Berkshire (vc22). Previously more widespread but very locally distributed, with further pre-80 records from the Rye Harbour area (both in East Sussex and East Kent, vc15), as well as colonies at Seaton, South Devon (vc3), Dungeness, East Kent (vc15), Wicken Fen, Cambridgeshire (vc29), Spurn, South-east Yorkshire (vc61) and Shirley Pool, South-west Yorkshire (vc63). Apparent recent decline in its British distribution to just three locations and apparent continuing decline mean conservation intervention is desirable. Work to understand its current status and ecological requirements will be required. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Current status, distribution and ecological requirements poorly understood. Targeted survey required. |
| 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: | Currently thought to have a very restricted distribution and with unclear habitat requirements. Most records refer to B. occidentalis occurring steep clay or mud banks at the edge of pools, pits and ditches, or on similar substrates around seepages running down coastal soft cliffs. However, it has also been collected on inland bare peat in Ireland and this may have been its habitat at Wicken Fen. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Combination or other (detail in comments) |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Given the range of habitats this species has been recorded from it is difficult to identify threats, however, populations on soft-rock cliffs and coastal grazing marsh are threatened by rising sea levels and increasing frequency and intensity of storms. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Targeted survey of known sites in Rye Harbour and Camber, as well as other historical sites - Dungeness, Seaton (South Devon), Wicken Fen NNR, Spurn Peninsula and Shirley Pool (south-west Yorkshire) to determine current status and distribution.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Rye and Camber area (East Sussex, vc14), Seaton, South Devon (vc3), Dungeness, East Kent (vc15), Wicken Fen, Cambridgeshire (vc29), Spurn, South-east Yorkshire (vc61) and Shirley Pool, South-west Yorkshire (vc63).
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Autecological study of populations identified by action 1 to better understand ecological requirements of this species.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Extant populations identified in action 1.
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Provide species advice/support for landscape scale coastal defence strategies to protect soft-rock cliffs and coastal grazing marsh from sea level rise, excessive erosion and disturbance.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: 6-10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Rye Harbour, Camber
Comments:
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.