York Ragwort (Senecio eboracensis)
Key Details
Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Herbaceous plant |
Red List Status: | Extinct in the Wild (globally) (Not Relevant) [EW(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: | Senecio eboracensis |
UKSI Recommended Authority: | R.J.Abbott & A.J.Lowe |
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: | York Groundsel is an English endemic that occurred in numerous sites in central York in the 1990s but became globally extinct in the wild by 2003 due to development of brown field sites and increased used of weed killers. Thankfully some seed had been retained by Richard Abbott and lodged in Kew's Millenium Seedbank. This was used by the British Rare Plant Nursery to propagate plants in 2021/22 and in 2023 and 2024 numerous sites close to historic locations were hand sown with seeds from these plants. This has led to establishment of the York Groundsel at numerous sites in Central York in areas where it used to occur (The Rare British Plants Nursery, 2024). |
Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
Response: | Yes |
Justification: | The species went globally extinct in the wild in 2003; subsequent reintroductions have reinstated it in the wild. |
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 would benefit from a more relaxed approach to managing urban spaces in York. It was lost due to overuse of herbicide in the city, which still continues. Such an approach would benefit other urban biodiversity. This engagement has been attempted through the current SRP project, with limited impact (seedlings still being sprayed with weedkiller) |
Species Assessment
Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 8. Species recovering |
Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
National Monitoring Resource: | Opportunistic - sufficient |
Species Comments: | monitoring being undertaken via SRP to establish whether the population is self-sustaining. Also local volunteers have been trained to identify and record is. Interest in recording it from BSBI VCRs covering the city. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Further introductions to suitable locations in York City centre should be undertaken until it is clear that it is self-sustaining in the wild and in locations unlikely to be destroyed and/or sprayed with weed killer..
Action targets: 8. Species recovering
Action type: (Re-)introduction
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: York City Centre
Comments: Already underway and starting to assess population stability in 2025
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Monitoring of reintroduction sites to assess the most suitable locations for future reintroductions and whether populations are surviving/self-sustaining.
Action targets: 8. Species recovering
Action type: Targeted monitoring
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 20 sites
High priority sites: York City Centre
Comments: Already underway
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Through advice and guidance, further reduce the use of weedkiller particularly in important areas for this species; perhaps combined with a media campaign.
Action targets: 8. Species recovering
Action type: Education/awareness raising
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: Unknown
High priority sites: York City Centre
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.