Scarce Emerald Damselfly (Lestes dryas)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - dragonfly (Odonata) > Dragonfly or damselfly |
| Red List Status: | Near Threatened (Not Relevant) [NT(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: | Lestes dryas |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Kirby, 1890 |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Daguet et al., 2008 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Listed in the British Odonata Red Data List (Daguet et al., 2008) as Near Threatened (qualified as Endangered under B2 but could not meet additional criteria). The whole British population is located in England. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Known breeding sites are all located in the East and South East of England. The species is only associated with shallow wetlands, often ephemeral, with dense emergent vegetation, such as streams, seepages, pools (including pingos in the Breckland area of Norfolk) and ditches, some of which are in coastal dunes and marshes, others within heathland. Without management, these habitats often become unsuitable as a result of natural succession. A lack of suitable habitat primarily limits this species' recovery. Existing sites are threatened by sea level rise (many sites are coastal and estuarine) and drought (breeding sites are shallow and prone to desiccation). |
| 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: | Yes |
| Justification: | Reestablish marshy, waterlogged areas with shallow vegetated pools. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 6. Recovery solutions trialled |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Climate change |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Species occupancy is being surveyed by the British Dragonfly Society Recording Scheme; however, it is likely to be under-recorded due to its similarities with the more common Lestes species. Some well-established sites are monitored. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Establish a national monitoring programme to monitor species and habitat at breeding sites. Monitoring programmes will collect data on population size and location, as well as the condition and location of suitable breeding habitat.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
Comments: Some monitoring is already being performed by NGOs and volunteer groups. Results used to inform Key Action 3. Would there be economies if the monitoring actions for Coenagrion mercuriale, Lestes dryas, and Somatochlora metallica were combined? There would be some reduction in cost, but the 3 species occur in different sites so you cannot monitor all 3 at the same site.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Trial habitat management and creation techniques aimed to: 1. Maintain a percentage cover of its preferred shallow wetland breeding habitat within the landscape. 2. Expand coastal grazing marshes to increase the availability of suitable habitats and offset loss predicted as a result of climate change- specifically breeding habitat: systems of shallow pools and ditches with dense emergent vegetation. Research should include species surveying to assess the success of trialled techniques.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: Not applicable
High priority sites:
Comments: Results used to inform Key Action 3
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Apply findings on previous action on a landscape level at key sites to encourage population growth and to compensate for predicted habitat loss as a result of sea level. Existing monitoring projects should be adapted to assess the success of habitat creation.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Landscape/catchment/marine management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: The duration, scale of implementation and priority sites will be determined by Key Actions 1 and 2.
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.