Chamomile (Chamaemelum nobile)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Herbaceous plant |
| 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: | Chamaemelum nobile |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (L.) All. |
| 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: | Still flourishing in certain strongholds (the Lizard, Dartmoor, New Forest) but continuing to decline across much of range |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | In many areas, generic habitat management (heavy grazing, rutting & poaching) maintains populations, but away from strongholds, it may be necessary to undertake targeted management to maintain 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: | High levels of extensive stock grazing on humid/wet acid grasslands (with associated poaching) will maintain species. Additionally, reversion of arable land/improved acid grassland to low input grasslands with high grazing is often colonised by C. nobile |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Species responds well to suitable management & recolonises 'lost' ground when suitable management reintroduced, assuming source of material close by. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Monitor populations within vulnerable / non-stronghold areas where plant is deemed native, assessing population size, health of populations & need for targeted management action. Review future management in light of findings.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 6-10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Ensure effective grazing regimes of heathland and acid commonland, to ensure that sites remain well-grazed & poached (undergrazing remains a significant threat). Creation of small seasonally-flooded waterbodies (e.g. hollows & pools, flooded trackways) should be created to benefit species
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: National
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Identify areas where habitat restoration / creation / expansion can provide suitable habitat for species, linking isolated or scattered populations.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat creation
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
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.