Argent & Sable (Rheumaptera hastata)
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: | Rheumaptera hastata |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Linnaeus, 1758) |
| 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: | GB Red List (Fox et al. 2019): LC; no long-term trend data available. Has suffered serious historical and recent losses of distribution in England in particular (remains widespread in western Scotland). |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | In woodland habitats requires rotational management; on bogs/heaths requires retention of small birches and Bog Myrtle, which are often removed during routine management. |
| 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: | Would benefit from management that creates early successional habitat in woodlands; also management that creates greater structural diversity of vegetation on bogs and heaths. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Some bespoke monitoring underway but not yet at sufficient sites to generate a population trend. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Ensure known sites are managed appropriately to provide a good supply of small birches and/or Bog Myrtle at all times. Requires bespoke advice to landowners which may sometimes conflict with routine site conservation management.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Whixall & Bettisfield Mosses, Shapwick Heath, Staffordshire/Nottinghamshire woodlands, Cumbrian mosses
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Undertake adult and/or 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: Whixall & Bettisfield Mosses, Shapwick Heath, Staffordshire/Nottinghamshire woodlands, Cumbrian mosses
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Bespoke monitoring currently underway at just 2 sites. Establish annual monitoring at an additional 5-10 sites in order to be able to generate a population trend for this species. Monitoring can be undertaken at either the adult or larval stage.
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Whixall & Bettisfield Mosses, Shapwick Heath, Staffordshire/Nottinghamshire woodlands, Cumbrian mosses
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.