Uloborus walckenaerius
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: | Uloborus walckenaerius |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Latreille, 1806 |
| 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, criteria: B2a: hectad count unchanged since 2017 review but less evidence of recent decline. Restricted to C-S England. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Fragmented distribution and rare in relation to its preferred 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: | Can be found in abundance at some sites but restricted range suggests recovery potential is likely to be low. May benefit from increasing heathland quality and connectivity but only likely in vicinity of existing populations. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Targeted survey of all recorded, nearby and apparently suitable 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: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Former sites in Hants/Dorset heaths
Comments:
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: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Focus on sites where species is found reliably
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Advise heathland land managers on the need for maintenance and connectivity of mature heather areas through heathland complexes in vicinity of known populations (informed by Action 1). Refine advice with information from Action 2.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Advice & support
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Surrey and Dorset/Hants heaths
Comments: Action likely to be absorbed within site restoration programme/s.
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.