Heath Dog-violet (Viola canina)
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: | Viola canina |
| 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: | VU in England, NT in GB (but likely to be upgraded to VU in the revised GB Red List) |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | Substantial declines since the mid-1980s, and ongoing, mainly due to neglect or undergrazing of grassland/heathland habitat, but also via hybridisation with V. riviniana. |
| 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: | There is potential to reverse declines by reintroducing grazing and/or encouraging dispersal from nearby sites at a landscape scale |
Species Assessment
| Current step on the Species Recovery Curve (SRC): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Combination - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Although in decline, this is still a widespread species, and can also be difficult to identify accurately if there is introgression with V. riviniana. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Undertake a review of English sites to identify key sites from a national perspective and where management is needed to restore/recover populations which may be of regional importance (e.g. edge of range, last site in a vice-county, etc.)
Action targets: 3. National Monitoring Plan agreed and implemented
Action type: Status survey/review
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Undertake a study of what is known about its ecological requirements, assess its restoration potential and methods for recovery in England, and investigate the threat posed by hybridisation with V. riviniana.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
High priority sites:
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Based on the findings from Actions 1 and 2, ensure that key sites flagged as under threat from under- or over-grazing are restored to appropriate levels of livestock pressure.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: >10 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 50 sites
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.