Baryphyma gowerense
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > spider (Araneae) > Spider |
| 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: | Baryphyma gowerense |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Locket, 1965) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Harvey et al., 2017 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | VU, criteria: B2ab(iv): most records from Wales (11 hectads) but recorded in its 2 English hectads since 2000. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Occurrence even more restricted than that of its habitat |
| 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): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Combination or other (detail in comments) |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | In England, found in tussocky calcareous fen vegetation including in Sphagnum, and stands of Cladium mariscus, and dense Juncus subnodulosus. A large and distinctive linyphyiid that is unlikely to be overlooked in survey. Recovery likelihood, especially in England, likely to be affected by ongoing hydrological challenges as well as its natural rarity as a very restricted habitat specialist. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Targeted re-survey of recorded and nearby sites, using standardised methodology to assess current status (and establish baseline for national monitoring programme)
Action targets: 2. Biological status assessment exists
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Sutton & Catfield Fens and Woodbastwick/Bure Marshes, Norfolk
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Autecological research to better characterise habitat requirements and inform management
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Sutton & Catfield Fens and Woodbastwick/Bure Marshes, Norfolk.
Comments: Focus on most reliable site but will only be viable if animals can be found in sufficient numbers and/or past finds sufficiently closely localised to identify habitat. Consider including Welsh sites bearing in mid likelihood of regional differences in habitat preferences.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Ensure site managers are aware of species past/recent presence and vulnerability on their sites. Update them with Action 1 and 2 results to provide any resulting guidance on locations/management and inform commissioning of invertebrate survey work (methods likely to detect/damage species, need for retention and examination of spider by-catch when not a survey target)
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: Unknown
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Sutton & Catfield Fens and Woodbastwick/Bure Marshes, Norfolk
Comments: Assemble mailing list and update site managers at species-appropriate intervals; most easily delivered by BAS/SRS.
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.