Meadow Clary (Salvia pratensis)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Herbaceous plant |
| Red List Status: | Near Threatened (Not Relevant) [NT(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: | Salvia pratensis |
| 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: | Although there is little evidence of recent decline, the long-lived nature of the plant means that populations with little/no recruitment may be carrying an extinction debt. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Achieving population maintenance/increase has not always proved easy without specific, targeted action. |
| 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 would not benefit from untargeted management |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 6. Recovery solutions trialled |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Establish a database of all current native and reintroduction sites, to include information on population size, any recent change in population size, any known recent recruitment to the population, current protection and management measures at each site, and the potential for expansion of the population within the site.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Because this species is currently classed NT, the first priority should be to ensure existing sites are secured in order to avoid further decline and the plant gaining a formal threat status.
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Identify a minimum of ten sites within the species' former range where reintroduction would have a high likelihood of success, taking into account geology/soils, current and potential future management of each site, level of protection afforded each site, and the potential for population growth and spread at each site.
Action targets: 7. Best approach adopted at appropriate scales
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: The low number and dispersed nature of most existing populations strongly suggests that natural colonisation of new sites would, at best, be very slow.
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Grow up plants ex situ using seed collected from known native or reintroduced populations, and use these as the basis of reintroduction at a minimum of 5 sites identified under action 2. Plants should be planted out at around 3 years of age to reduce, when they have substantial rosettes but before they reach flowering size, and spaced at least 2m apart to allow room for spread and for seedling establishment. Each reintroduction site should receive around 50 plants.
Action targets: 8. Species recovering
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites:
Comments: Depending on the results of action 1, it may be necessary to introduce plants to existing populations where these are small and where it is considered that low genetic variation is restricting seed production or seedling viability. Genetic profiling should be undertaken using samples from a range of known native populations and known or suspected introduced populations in order to establish which populations can properly be recognised as native and therefore used as sources for reintroductions.
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.