A Sea-lavender (Limonium recurvum)
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: | Limonium recurvum |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | C.E.Salmon |
| UKSI Recommended Qualifier: | (none specified) |
| Red List Citation: | in Stroh et al., 2014 |
| Notes on taxonomy/listing: | Many subspp. recognised; apomictic |
Criteria
| Question 1: | Does species need conservation or recovery in England? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | In England this near endemic is restricted to limestone cliffs and quarries on Portland Bill in Dorset where its tiny populations are vulnerable to quarrying, trampling and coastal erosion (Stroh et al., 2023). Although its populations appear to be stable it was assessed as VU in GB and England due to its restriction to less than five sites (Cheffings et al., 2005; Stroh et al., 2014). |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | This species has a tiny population that highly susceptible to land use activities damaging its fragile habitat (e.g. quarrying, visitor pressure, erosion). It is therefore reliant on close monitoring and site protection. |
| 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 is too rare to benefit from non-targeted management. |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 2. Biological status assessment exists |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Low - Relict or natural rarity |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Consider the use of site designation/protection for populations vulnerable to land use changes and damaging operations.
Action targets: 2. Biological status assessment exists
Action type: Site protection
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Portland Bill
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Undertake a regular survey of all known populations to estimate population sizes and assess threats/condition.
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Portland Bill
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Propagate plants ex situ in case of extinction in England and with a view to reintroduce to Portland, potentially at a public viewing site.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Ex situ conservation
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: Unknown
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.