Heath Cudweed (Gnaphalium sylvaticum)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Herbaceous plant |
| 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: | Omalotheca sylvatica |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (L.) Sch.Bip. & F.W.Schultz |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | in Stroh et al., 2014 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | Omalotheca sylvatica |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Species shows a strong, ongoing decline in Area of Occupancy. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Reasons for decline are not clearly understood, but changes in disturbance regimes in woodlands may be implicated. |
| 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: | The species' reliance on woodland open space and periodic disturbance for germination suggests that increased structural diversity in woodland could be of benefit. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Establish a programme of research to elucidate the ecology of the species. This research should be carried out on a series of sites representing the geographic and habitat range of the species. Research should cover the factors controlling/affecting germination, longevity of individual plants, seed production, and seed dispersal, and should include experimental management aimed at local population increase.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 6-10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Identify a suite of SSSIs, nature reserves or other sites where the species occurred within the last 10-40 years but has not been seen for at least 5 years, and subject them to experimental management work, such as ground disturbance, woodland ride creation and/or coppicing, with the aim of restoring a population of the plant.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Reappearance from the soil seed bank has been recorded in one case after and 18 year absence of above-ground plants.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Carry out periodic monitoring of a sample of sites, based (for example) on the BSBI's Threatened Plants Project in order to gauge local population change and threats and to provide an assessment of the success of actions 1 and 2.
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 100 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: To be repeated every 5 years.
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.