Musk Orchid (Herminium monorchis)
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: | Herminium monorchis |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (L.) R.Br. |
| 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: | Having suffered a 54% reduction in AOO (Stroh et al. 2014), this species is now largely confined to SE and central-southern England, where about 70 sites have been recorded since 2000. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Like many species of short-grazed downland and limestone grassland, this species been lost from many sites through a loss or relaxation of livestock grazing, compounded in some cases due to a decline in rabbit numbers in recent decades. |
| 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 may benefit in the long-term from programmes and projects that create and restore grasslands on calcareous soils, e.g. on Salisbury Plain and the South Downs. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Climate change |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - sufficient |
| Species Comments: |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Reinstate appropriate levels of grazing on sites, particularly those with small populations, where this species has declined due to increased competition from tall grasses and scrub.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Ensure that new and recently colonised sites, including abandoned quarries, are provided with appropriate management, and that owners/managers are aware of the plant and its importance through provision of advice and support for appropriate management.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Undertake a research programme determine responses to climate change, particularly vulnerability to drought and heat but also potential positive response to increased rainfall, through detailed monitoring of a targeted suite of sites.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Climate change adaptation
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 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.