German Hairy Snail (Pseudotrichia rubiginosa)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > mollusc > Mollusc (non-marine) |
| Red List Status: | Near Threatened (Not Relevant) [NT(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: | Pseudotrichia rubiginosa |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Rossmässler, 1838) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Seddon et al., 2014 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Confined to England . NT in red list and restricted to marshes along the Thames in London and a few other sites upstream of London and the Medway. Current status is uncertain. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | A survey of known former sites is required to gain current range and presence could be undertaken in conjunction with assessment upgrade for Balea biplicata (1810). |
| 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: | Management of marginal willow beds, blocks of alder and river marginal marshes (e.g. as at Syon Park, Twickenham) |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Relict or natural rarity |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | The species requires protection and maintenance of the habitat (willows, alder, marginal marshes and associated flood debris) and allowing natural flooding of rivers. River pollution may also be affecting this species. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Undertake targeted surveys to establish current presence at selected sites to feed into a possible update of the Red List dependent upon survey outcomes.
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Selected former sites on lower Thames e.g. Syon Park, Isleworth Ait & a couple of Medway sites.
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Targeted management of marginal willow beds, blocks of alder and river marginal marshes (e.g. as at Syon Park, Twickenham) at known sites and sites discovered through Action 1.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Selected former sites on lower Thames e.g. Syon Park, Isleworth Ait & a couple of Medway sites.
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.