Heath Rustic (Xestia agathina)
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: | Xestia agathina |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Duponchel, 1827) |
| 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; GB long term abundance decline of 78%. Long term distribution broadly stable although short term trend is non-significant -31% |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | No |
| Justification: | A moorland species whose decline is likely driven by intensification of management in this habitat although precise causes are unknown. One of the widespread but declining moths that requires research into drivers of decline. |
| 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: | With current knowledge these factors would not benefit the species. Most likely causes of decline are increased frequency of burning and over-grazing. It could be argued that these increase the structural diversity but are having a negative impact and that structural homogeneity is better for this species. |
Species Assessment
Not relevant as no Key Actions defined.
Key Actions
No Key Actions Defined
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.