Small-flowered Hawkweed (Hieracium ampliatiforme)
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: | Hieracium ampliatiforme |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | P.D.Sell |
| 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: | English endemic known from 3 sites in Yorkshire, 5 in central Lake District and one in Upper Teesdale, only small populations seen in 6/9 sites 1994-2021 and currently 'Endangered' (Rich 2025 in press). Predominantly an upland cliff species where nature of cliff sites means little practical can be done and will benefit more from overall reduction in upland grazing. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | No |
| Justification: | Upland sites tend to be on cliffs where threats are minimal and little conservation action is practical - main requirement is reduction in grazing at landscape scale. Small quantity of seed held in Millennium Seed Bank. |
| 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: | main requirement is reduction in grazing at landscape scale |
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.