Bure Long-legged Fly (Dolichopus nigripes)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > insect - true fly (Diptera) > Long-legged fly |
| Red List Status: | Vulnerable (Not Relevant) [VU(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | Included in the baseline Red List Index for England (Wilkins, Wilson & Brown, 2022) |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | (none) |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Dolichopus nigripes |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Fallén, 1823 |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Drake, 2018 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Two studies in 2007-9 and 2010-11 are responsible for the majority of records, most sites are protected so may not be accessed by recorders very often. S41 listed and Vulnerable with a restricted distribution within fens of the Bure Valley in Norfolk. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | The species has shown a small decline of distribution however it appears that this was never a widespread species. The restricted distribution within an area of apparently similar fen habitat would indicate that specific approaches within known sites would be needed to conserve the species. The sites of interest are managed, so defining what different approaches should be adopted as new, or maintained will drive whether new actions are required or not. |
| 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: | This species would not benefit from untargeted management |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Life history factor/s |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Restricted within surrounding areas of high quality fen, the species when surveyed for in 2010-2011 showed a preference for shorter fen vegetation such as fen meadow, mown grass paths, potentially with saturated peat, being essential as a larval substrate. |
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 D. nigripes is present or potentially absent so that further targeted actions can be implemented. Previous study sites from 2010-2011 could be targeted to ascertain if populations have been maintained.
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Norfolk: Woodbastwick Fen (TG3316), Horning Fen (TG3516), Reedham Marsh (TG36591899). A single record exists from Catfield Great Fen (TG365209)
Comments: Targeted surveying to establish whether populations remain both within sites and in adjacent areas of similar habitat.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Assessment of site quality to establish whether sites are in optimal condition or unfavourable. Management that would support the species has been in place at Bure marshes in the past so the site may be suitable still. Introduction of similar practices at other sites may need to be implemented if they are assessed as being unsuitable or degraded.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Special (in situ) measure
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Norfolk: Woodbastwick Fen (TG3316), Horning Fen (TG3516), Reedham Marsh (TG36591899). A single record exists from Catfield Great Fen (TG365209)
Comments: Approaches could include regular mowing of the grass paths, and mowing and light grazing by ponies and cattle to create small areas of fen meadow assumed to be preferred by Dolichopus nigripes over taller vegetation.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Actions designed to improve or enhance site condition based on previous site assessment and action 1 & 2. prevention of scrub encroachment and active measures to maintain water levels.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Norfolk: Woodbastwick Fen (TG3316), Horning Fen (TG3516), Reedham Marsh (TG36591899). A single record exists from Catfield Great Fen (TG365209)
Comments: Targeted actions would soley be dependent on the results of the previous survey/assessment. Projected actions could be prevention of scrub encroachment and active measures to maintain water levels.
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.