Mountain Hare (Lepus timidus)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vertebrate > terrestrial mammal > Rabbit or hare |
| 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: | Lepus timidus |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Linnaeus, 1758 |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | Mathews & Harrower, 2020 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Highest densities of mountain hares associated with ecologically restored bog but not grouse moorland management. Subsequent surveys 2022 to 2024 in same areas show statistically significant continual decline from 2018 to 2024 > 60% to ~1,000 individuals. Reasons for decline are unknown. Natural fluctuation of hare populations believed to cycle ~90% over four to ten years. Hunted and offtake by gamekeepers. Post covid greatly increased pressure of public visiting Peak District uplands, which may potentially displace mountain hares or alternatively engender habituation or tolerance to humans. Disease. Climate change response of mountain hares to increased temperatures / less snow. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | The mountain hare population in England consist of a small isolated population in the Peak District. This population is subject to specific threats including competition with brown hares and genetic depression. Additionally, there are gaps in our understanding of their population dynamics. Addressing these threats will require species-specific actions. |
| 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: | Blanket bog restoration has been conducive to higher mountain hare numbers and its continuation would be beneficial to the species. Improvement to heather management also brings benefits where large contiguous areas <1km^2 have been left unmanaged are mature > 1m high and are impenetrable. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Structured - sufficient |
| Species Comments: | Systematic monitoring is conducted each year from Jan to April, and provides reliable confidence intervals of estimates. Species raw count data has consistently declined since 2018 by more than 50% statistically significant. Causes not known. Possibly cyclic populations, or factors mentioned in previous section. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Provide the high quality mosaic of plant communities for foraging and shelter that the species needs through targeted restoration of blanket bog/peatland habitat within the Peak District National Park, to provide the high quality mosaic of plant communities for foraging and shelter that the species needs.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Habitat creation
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
Comments: Largely down to landowners to agree and implement, will require engagement persuasion. Implementation of traffic calming measures with potential to reduce roadkill would also be important.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Seek to fully protect the species for listing under Schedule 5 of the Wildlife and Countryside Act (1981) as recommended to the UK government through the JNCC Quinquennial review 7 process.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Legal protection
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Assess population structure, implementing GPS collaring and monitoring studies to understand causes of mortality and model extinction risk.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
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.