Hairy Canary (Phaonia jaroschewskii)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - true fly (Diptera) > Fly |
| Red List Status: | (Not Relevant) [(not listed)(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | (none) |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Phaonia jaroschewskii |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Schnabl, 1888) |
| 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: | There are records and images posted on-line by Steven Falk from Pennington Marshes in Hampshire from 2011; Sutton Park, Birmingham 2018 and undated from Church Moor Hampshire. Most other records from the past 10 years are from Yorkshire (n=4). |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | There is some debate as to the rarity of the species and Falk queries it's complete reliance on Blanket Bog. Further exploratory work would seem justified to confirm the species status and then to see if targeted actions are appropriate. |
| 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: | Maintaining water levels and preventing damage to Sphagnum within these areas. Keeping areas and associated wetland, free from scrub encroachment. Mitigate against risk from drainage or abstraction in surrounding areas and peat extraction. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Life history factor/s |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Larvae were presumed to live within wet Sphagnum, predating on small invertebrates. Further research if populations can be found into biology would help especially of the habitat requirement is found to be less specific. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Tailored surveys of habitat in known or potential habitat localities to determine the populations and species distribution, thus identifying areas where P. jaroschewskii is present.
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: New Forest Hampshire, Pennington Marshes, Church Moor; SE Hampshire, Longdown Enclosure (SU360085)Birmingham, Sutton Park; SE Yorkshire, North Cliffe Woods (SE864369), SW Yorkshire Thorne Moors (SE73181543), NE Yorkshire, Strenshall Common (SE651613) SE Yorkshire Skipwith Common, (SE665368)
Comments: To establish if populations are still present, if so then targeted actions can be put in place. Adults are quite distinctive and should be straightforward to identify (especially males) with the right keys. See Steve Falk's Flickr for images: https://www.flickr.com/photos/63075200@N07/albums/72157632827488537/
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: If populations are found, especially in habitats other than blanket bog then studies to discover the exact larval habitat requirements would be useful for further targeted actions.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: New Forest Hampshire, Pennington Marshes, Church Moor; SE Hampshire, Longdown Enclosure (SU360085)Birmingham, Sutton Park; SE Yorkshire, North Cliffe Woods (SE864369), SW Yorkshire Thorne Moors (SE73181543), NE Yorkshire, Strenshall Common (SE651613) SE Yorkshire Skipwith Common, (SE665368)
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Active approaches to maintaining water levels and preventing damage to Sphagnum within these areas by keeping inhabited areas and associated wetland, free from scrub encroachment and mitigation against risk from drainage, peat extraction and abstraction in surrounding areas.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: New Forest Hampshire, Pennington Marshes, Church Moor; SE Hampshire, Longdown Enclosure (SU360085)Birmingham, Sutton Park; SE Yorkshire, North Cliffe Woods (SE864369), SW Yorkshire Thorne Moors (SE73181543), NE Yorkshire, Strenshall Common (SE651613) SE Yorkshire Skipwith Common, (SE665368) should populations be found to persist.
Comments: Approaches may be individual to sites if found to be inhabited.
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.