Tegenaria picta
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: | Eratigena picta |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Simon, 1870) |
| 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: D2: no further decline since 2017 review. Restricted to 4 hectads in SE England. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Very restricted distribution, even in relation to its apparent habitat specialism |
| 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: | Opportunistic - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Recorded from under stones largely in chalkpits in SE England. No evidence of it formerly being more widespread. Common under stones in woodlands on near continent so may be edge of range here in addition to occupying a limited-area habitat. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Targeted survey of all former sites and similar chalk pit habitat in SE 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: Merstham, Quarry Hangers, Surrey; Amberley Chalk Pits, West Sussex; Selsey Bill, West Sussex; Portsdown Hill, Hants.
Comments: At Amberley Pits, combine with action for Centromerus albidus, using timings that maximise likelihood of finding both species
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Autecological research to establish microhabitat requirements and inform management
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: 1 site
High priority sites: Amberley Chalk Pits
Comments: Initial focus on most recent/reliable site. At Amberley Pits, combine action with that for Centromerus albidus.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Advise site managers on maintenance of scrub management (advice refined with information on current status and autecological research (Actions 1 and 2))
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: Unknown
Scale of Implementation: 1 site
High priority sites: Amberley Chalk Pits
Comments: Combine action with that for Tegenaria/Eratigena picta.
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.