Surrey Midget (Phyllonorycter scabiosella)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - moth > Moth |
| Red List Status: | (Not Relevant) [(not listed)(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | (none) |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Phyllonorycter scabiosella |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Douglas, 1853) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | (not listed) |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | (No GB Red List for micro-moths.) Highly restricted distribution on the North Downs in Surrey and Kent. Most populations appear to be small, sites are generally isolated from one another. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Habitat specialist that requires bespoke management of downland sites (generic management often creates a sward that is too short for the moth). Targeted monitoring / status assessments also 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: | Yes |
| Justification: | If this resulted in longer turf areas on heavily grazed sites. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Recovery potential may be restricted by isolation of sites. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Ensure that occupied and potential sites are not heavily grazed, so that longer turf areas are present which promote the larger basal leaves required by the moth's larva.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: 6-10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Kent
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Undertake larval surveys at all remaining sites at least once every 3-5 years.
Action targets: 2. Biological status assessment exists
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Undertake research to ascertain autecology, especially the precise requirements of the larvae and thus establish the viability of establishing populations at sites occupied by other longer-turf specialists such as Black-veined Moth.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Kent
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.