Military Orchid (Orchis militaris)
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: | Orchis militaris |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | L. |
| 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: | Assessed as VU in England due to the small number of mature individuals (<1,000), and also the small number of locations (<5). It is present in three locations; Swains Wood and Homefield Wood, both in Buckinghamshire, and the Rex Graham Reserve in West Suffolk. The former two locations are chalk grassland/woodland glades, and the latter a chalk-pit. Numbers have remained relatively stable over time, and seem to have increased at Swains in recent years, in part due to hand-pollination and planting out of plug plants. All three locations are entirely dependent on volunteer conservation effort to retain the species. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | The areas where the orchid persists are all small, and are vulnerable to scrub encroachment, and competition by species such as Upright Brome and Tor Grass. Sites must be managed to establish and then maintain a grazed, relatively open sward and open wood-edge habitat. |
| 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: | This species is very rare, and although the dispersal potential is theoretically high, it would appear to have a specific ecological niche (perhaps associated with a mycorrhizal fungus) that has deterred establishment at nearby sites that would appear to be suitable (i.e. they have a similar assemblage of plants, are managed well, are close by and on the chalk). However, recovery of high quality wood edge habitat generally could be beneficial given future climate change scenarios. |
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: | Structured - sufficient |
| Species Comments: | At all three locations, volunteers monitor the number of flowering spikes. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Implement livestock grazing, or woodland edge management, that results in relatively open conditions.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: All current sites
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Monitor grazing levels at Swains Wood to provide an open and diverse sward. Take appropriate action to increase/decrease stock numbers as necessary. Continue with programme of scrub management where necessary at Homefield Wood.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: All current sites
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Undertake a programme of scrub removal at the three locations, to create exemplars of wood edge habitat.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: Unknown
High priority sites:
Comments: All current sites
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.