Cut-grass (Leersia oryzoides)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Grass |
| Red List Status: | Endangered (Not Relevant) [EN(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: | Leersia oryzoides |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (L.) Sw. |
| 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: | A rhizomatous perennial grass of nutrient-rich mud around the cattle-trampled margins of lakes and ponds, in ditches, on canal banks and riversides; also formerly in wet meadows. It has a very restricted distribution with most extant populations centred on Amberley Wild Brooks in Sussex with outliers in Surrey; it is extinct in Hampshire and Somerset although it has been successfully reintroduced to the former. It has suffered declines historically due to the loss of wetlands and meadows and as a consequence it was assessed as EN in GB and England (Cheffings et al., 2005; Stroh et al., 2014). |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | This species is reliant on cattle grazing of riverbanks to reduce competition from other species and create trampled areas for regeneration although it rarely flowers and seems therefore to spread vegetatively at most sites. |
| 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 is now restricted to a very small number of sites and is therefore unlikely to benefit form non-targeted management. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Life history factor/s |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - sufficient |
| Species Comments: |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Undertake a survey of extant sites and those where the species has been recorded in recent times to establish key sites, habitat condition and recommendations for recovery.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Implementation of recommendations from site survey/assessment which is likely to include recommendations for appropriate cattle grazing regimes at key sites.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: To be determined
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Trial reintroduction at former sites including Hampshire and Somerset where the plant is thought to be extinct.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: Unknown
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.