Grass Snake (Natrix helvetica)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > reptile > Reptile |
| Red List Status: | Least Concern (Not Relevant) [LC(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | Included in the baseline Red List Index for England (Wilkins, Wilson & Brown, 2022) |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | Natrix natrix |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Natrix helvetica |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (Lacépède, 1789) |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Foster et al., 2021 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Grass snake populations have often been degraded by changes in the landscape including reduction in the availability of egg-laying substrates. The species requires recovery action as it has reduced conservation status. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | To a great extent, recovery will be aided by generic actions, but some species-specific action is also needed to ensure the particular needs of the species are considered, and so that action is properly advised on, co-ordinated and evaluated. |
| 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 would likely benefit substantially from efforts to increase habitat diversity. The scale of benefits would depend on precisely what work was done. It is important to create corridors to link existing and restored habitats, particularly with associations to wet areas. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 5. Remedial action identified |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Further development of and investment in national monitoring is required. The National Reptile Survey (NRS, part of the National Amphibian and Reptile Monitoring Programme) started recently and will generate useful data with further uptake. Considerable data was gathered as part of the Snakes in the Heather project and it would be good to try to find a successor to this, to continue to monitor populations and habitat preferences. It would also be useful to determine the state of this species on a national level and to determine reasons for declines. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Grass snake populations are often restricted by the lack of suitable egg-laying sites, and other key decline factors include habitat loss, fragmentation and reduction of habitat suitability by natural succession (including ponds). Explore solutions for the management and creation of habitat, to relieve key threats including fragmentation, excessive shading (created by tree planting and/or lack of management), and conflicts in management objectives for co-occurring species.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 6-10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: National, although potential to concentrate on specific areas where this species has declined. Possibly taking into account the potential effects of climate change.
Comments: This research would involve experimental habitat management, trialling solutions for a number of threats to grass snakes. Issues to address include reduction in availability of egg-laying sites, road mortality, loss of connectivity, deterioration of wetland features. The action will also consider the likely impacts of a changing climate and the implications for management. This action could potentially be brigaded with the similar action for grass snake, adder and common lizard, as there is an overlap in some issues. This could include habitat quality as well as pressures on specific habitats such as hibernation sites and breeding areas. It could include further research on movements and vulnerability of juveniled and threats from predation. Also the effects of pesticides and other pollutants, especially in connection with water bodies and aquatic prey.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Identify, and consider the potential to designate, sites as SSSIs with widespread reptiles as an interest feature (reptile assemblage).
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Site protection
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites: Possibly focus on south and south-east England, or other areas of declining populations.
Comments: Identification of ≤ 20 SSSIs. Identification of around 10 sites per county or equivalent area for non-statutory designation (most likely Local Wildlife Sites). This is proposed as a 'brigaded action' for the four widespread reptile species, where many of the sites would be designated for several of these species. For widespread reptiles (excluding adders) designation on SSSIs can only be notified as part of a reptile assemblage feature. The revised (Bernhard et al., 2022) SSSI guidance for amphibians and reptiles provides better guidance for boundary setting, which will facilitate designation of larger SSSIs than previously. Aside from its inherent benefits now, this action would help future-proof the protected site series for reptiles in the face of a changing climate.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Different activities and habitat types pose specific opportunities and threats for the species, and practical guidance will help to maximise conservation benefit and to minimise negative impacts. Develop guidance and training courses for specific themes of significance to the conservation of this species, including: management of agricultural land ; management of especially favourable habitats such as linear features like road verges, and improving connectivity with the wider countryside; forestry; re-wilding; protected sites; development impacts; disturbance impacts; wildfire prevention and response.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Education/awareness raising
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
Comments: Brigaded action across four widespread reptile species (slow-worm, common lizard, grass snake and adder). This action would include simple guidance leaflets/PDFs, detailed guidance (including a web-based resource), road shows, videos, and training courses. To be developed over a period of three years. Over a longer period of time these resources would be updated to take account of new research and practice (including from work proposed in Action 1), and also as pressures and potential conservation measures change. Brigaded action as many of the issues will be similar across the four widespread reptile species; however, species-specific guidance will be required and incorporated as relevant.
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.