Desmoulin's Whorl Snail (Vertigo moulinsiana)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > mollusc > Mollusc (non-marine) |
| 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: | Vertigo (Vertigo) moulinsiana |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Dupuy, 1849) |
| 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: | Although widespread in southern and eastern England, in many areas (e.g. Hampshire/Wiltshire Avon), this species has declined by more that 80%. It is also found in Wales. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Associated with fen vegetation which may be lost to succession (and consequently shading) without appropriate management. There are also issues around extremes of water fluctuation (both drought and extreme flooding) negatively impact populations. |
| 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: | This species can benefit from maintaining open unshaded fen and extensive and deep riparian zones |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Structured - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | This species has a high potential of recovery if appropriate management can be put in place and water levels managed appropriately. The species is heavily impacted by drought and flood episodes in structurally simplified and inadequate floodplain habitat and only restoring this can recovery be delivered. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Undertake bespoke scrub removal to prevent shading of the fen habitat in both fens and around the meres and pools. Ensure both flood and drought events are mitigated where practicable.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 100 sites
High priority sites: Hampshire/Wiltshire Avon corridor and the Kennet catchment, Dorset rivers Frome and Piddle, Norfolk Broads, isolated sites in West Sussex Arun valley catchment and east Kent marshes.
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Establish headwater populations with suitable hydrological management and extensive adjacent habitat to facilitate headwater re-introductions into the floodplain systems.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: The fluvial SAC series for it, principally
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.