Fen Orchid (Liparis loeselii)
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: | Liparis loeselii |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | (L.) Rich. |
| 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: | EN; known from 6 (arguably 4) native sites, + 1 extant reintro; population growing but still fairly low (c. 15,000 plants) |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | SRP studies show that broad-brush management alone, cannot deliver recovery to lost sites |
| 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: | Many derelict/succeeded fens in range that could be rendered more suitable by landscape scale actions, particularly those that promote propagule dispersal |
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: | Small size and low visibility of plant, coupled with large area of (potential) habitat, make monitoring resource hungry and difficult |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Reintroduce (experimentally) to all former sites in suitable condition
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 10 sites
High priority sites: Thelnetham Old Fen, Blo' Norton Fen, Ranworth Broad marshes, Woodbastwick Marshes, Lopham Fens, S Lopham, Redgrave fen, Wicken Fen, Chippenham Fen,
Comments: Implies required monitoring of reintro's is built in
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Restore short rotation mowing to tall fen sites within range
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: Bure Marshes, Ranworth Marshes, Reedham Marshes, Barton Broad Marshes
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Restore fen habitats to fen succeeded to woodland
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Landscape/catchment/marine management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites: Bure Marshes, Ranworth Marshes, Reedham Marshes, Barton Broad Marshes
Comments: Heavy restoration work
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.