Holly-fern (Polystichum lonchitis)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > fern > Fern |
| 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: | Polystichum lonchitis |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (L.) Roth |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | in Stroh et al., 2014 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | (none) |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | EN in England, a recent survey showed c.550 individuals across 16-17 sites in England, with three sites in the Yorkshire Dales comprising the bulk of the population (c.400). this is a substantial increase on the previous estimate of 250 individuals |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Control of grazing is needed at many sites in order to allow recovery of populations |
| 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: | In England, mainly a species of limestone pavement/scree in open and extensive sheep grazed upland pastures, although removal of grazing from some populations has led to a recovery of populations suggesting that overgrazing is a major issue limiting this species |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - sufficient |
| Species Comments: | A recent survey showed twice the number of plants than previously estimated presumably due to greater recording effort as well as recovery at some sites (due to changes in grazing regime). Further surveys are needed in the North Pennines and Lake District although these are unlikely to change the overall picture |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Review performance of plant in relation to management/site history to identify why it has declined at existing and disappeared from former sites
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: Not applicable
High priority sites: Moughton Common, Arncliffe Clowders, Fell End Clouds
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Anecdotal evidence suggests that reducing grazing pressures at key sites by shifting to cattle grazing or fencing of populations where appropriate will allow recovery
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Moughton Common, Arncliffe Clowders, Fell End Clouds
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Survey and assess condition of Lake District and North Pennine populations
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: The Yorkshire Fern Group have already surveyed Yorkshire Dales populations and plan to extend this to North Pennines and Lake District in due course
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.