Scopaeus minutus
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - beetle (Coleoptera) > Rove beetle (macrostaph) |
| Red List Status: | Critically Endangered (Not Relevant) [CR(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: | Scopaeus minutus |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Erichson, 1840 |
| 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: | A very rare species, only ever known from around Bridport and Charmouth on the Jurassic coast, Dorset (vc9) where it is associated with bare sand and clay at the edge of seepages running down the cliffs. Soft-rock cliff habitats are increasingly threatened by sea level rise and increasing frequency and intensity of storms due to climate change causing excessive erosion. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Currently only known from a single stretch of the Dorset coast and dependent on quite specific habitat conditions. Targeted survey and actions are necessary to conserve this species. |
| 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 restricted to a single stretch of coastline in Dorset and dependent on uncommon habitat features that are very difficult to create through management. It seems unlikely that this species would colonise new habitats without assistance. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 6. Recovery solutions trialled |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Combination or other (detail in comments) |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Climate change will make soft rock coastal cliffs increasingly vulnerable as a habitat. The species also seems to be natural rarity and has only ever been known from a small area of coastline. Actions to increase area and resilience of suitable habitat may be at odds with other coastal management – e.g. sea defences to reduce erosion, although there may also be opportunities for these to work in the same direction. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Targeted survey of soft-rock cliffs in Dorset, including its known site, to search for additional populations of this species, elucidate autecology and more tightly characterise habitat requirements.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: around Bridport and Charmouth on the Jurassic coast, Dorset (vc9)
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Through advice and guidance, allow the consideration for the needs of this species in coastal defence strategies to protect soft-rock cliffs from excessive erosion and disturbance.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: 6-10 years
Scale of Implementation: Not applicable
High priority sites: Soft-rock cliffs around Bridport and Charmouth on the Jurassic coast, Dorset (vc9)
Comments: Reducing habitat loss resulting from sea level rise and increased storminess requires landscape scale strategic action such as beach recharge or modifications to hard coastal defences (working with EA and LPA). Shoreline Management Plans and other reviews will help identify locations where no action is necessary or, alternatively, where management measures are required to maintain suitable conditions for soft rock cliffs. Some erosion is required to maintain early successional conditions and bare substrate required by Bledius filipes so coastal defences that reduce erosion too much are likely to be detrimental.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Following successful mitigation and development/retention of suitable habitats, assess potential for successful re-introduction to historical locations or suitable nearby sites. It is important to restore suitable habitat conditions to any re-introduction sites.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Soft-rock cliffs around Bridport and Charmouth on the Jurassic coast, Dorset (vc9)
Comments: Ensuring suitable habitat conditions and management are present prior to any reintroduction is critical.
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.