Caraway (Carum carvi)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Herbaceous plant |
| Red List Status: | Endangered (Not Relevant) [EN(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | (none) |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Carum carvi |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | L. |
| 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: | No |
| Justification: | Although assessed as EN in Great Britain (BSBI 2021) and CR in England (Stroh et al. 2014), most occurrences of Caraway these days are casuals arising from cultivation. It was once much more widely grown and some populations became established in a variety of habitats, but the only remaining long-established site is a 'scruffy farm yard' in the village of Marsett (North-west Yorkshire), where it has been known since at least 1934 (Walker & Pearman 2012). |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | No |
| Justification: | Most sites today are casual plants on roadsides, railway banks, waste places and rubbish tips. The longest-established population survives in a farm yard without the need for species-specific action. |
| 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
Not relevant as no Key Actions defined.
Key Actions
No Key Actions Defined
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.