Chalk Planthopper (Eurysanoides douglasi)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - true bug (Hemiptera) > Bug |
| Red List Status: | (Not Relevant) [(not listed)(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | Eurysa douglasi |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Eurysanoides douglasi |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Scott, 1870) |
| 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: | Restricted to southern England: chalk grassland sites on South Downs & two isolated sites on North Downs. Species otherwise known only from Siberia, Greece & France. targeted survey in 2013-15 revealed new populations, but unclear whether this resulted from improved field technique (especially use of suction sampler). |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Apparently a specialist on Tor Grass (Brachypodium pinnatum), especially where tussock forming. |
| 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: | Does benefit from structural diversity in chalk grassland that allows tussock formation of host plant. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 5. Remedial action identified |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Unknown |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Previously thought to be exceptionally rare (4 sites in Kent), but focused suction sampling survey in 2015 revealed 17 sites across South Downs. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Autecological research to establish exact (micro)habitat requirements in relation to composition, height and structure of vegetation and impact of grazing.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: South Downs
Comments: Standardised survey of microhabitat association at ~10 sites on South Downs and 2+ sites on North Downs.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Trial small-scale (<1ha) habitat management (autumn cattle grazing) over 3 years to promote tussocky vegetation within three chalk grassland sites on South Downs chosen from the list of known sites, assessed by comparison with equivalent adjacent sheep-grazed area using standardised annual sampling.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: South Downs (10 known sites)
Comments: Locations to be selected from ten South Downs sites between Alfriston & Lancing where species recorded in 2015. May benefit from management for Wart Biter (Decticus verrucivorus).
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Raise awareness of importance of creating/retaining tussocky vegetation as minor component of chalk grassland through production and distribution of electronic / online advisory materials to farmers and other land owners / managers of relevant sites on South Downs.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Education/awareness raising
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: Not applicable
High priority sites: Land owners and/or managers of chalk grassland sites.
Comments: Advisory leaflet explaining techniques for appropriate management for the species in the context of general advice for management for chalk grassland.
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.