Gnaphosa occidentalis
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Invertebrate > spider (Araneae) > Spider |
| 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: | Gnaphosa occidentalis |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Simon, 1878 |
| 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: | NT: 2 new sites since 2017 review bringing total to 3, all in extreme SW of England. Threat status may increase at next review because of extremely restricted distribution and habitat vulnerability. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Much less frequent than apparently suitable 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: | Unknown |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Found, usually under stones, in frost-free, herb-rich cliff top grassland (not heath) <10m from cliff edge. Recovery potential unclear because factors apparently limiting distribution are unknown. Searches on other cliff tops sites further E have been unsuccessful. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Targeted re-survey of all apparently suitable cliff 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: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: All SW peninsula cliff top grasslands
Comments: Whenever possible, use opportunities to explore whether it also occurs on cliff faces. Significant H&S issues with survey for this species - best practise for cliff top sites to be strictly observed.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Site management to include of scrub control with aftermath grazing to maintain short, open turf.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Kynance Cove, Penhale Point, Gwennap Head and Hella Point, Cornwall
Comments: Action likely to be integral to wider management objectives for sites
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Consider the potential to extend SSSI boundaries at relevant sites, so to include all known populations within designated land.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Site protection
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Penhale population
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.