Fen Wood-rush (Luzula pallescens)
Key Details
| Taxonomic Groups: | Vascular plant > flowering plant > Rush |
| Red List Status: | Critically Endangered (Not Relevant) [CR(nr)] |
| D5 Status: | Included in the baseline Red List Index for England (Wilkins, Wilson & Brown, 2022) |
| Section 41 Status: | (not listed) |
| Taxa Included Synonym: | Luzula pallidula |
| UKSI Recommended Name: | Luzula pallescens |
| UKSI Recommended Authority: | Sw. |
| 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: | CR in England (and GB) - present in only two sites, and only recorded at one in recent years. |
| Question 2: | Does recovery/ conservation depend on species-specific actions? |
| Response: | Yes |
| Justification: | This species appears to be restricted to early successional habitat, with areas of regular disturbance and bare peat present. Recruitment is via a potentially long-lived seed bank. Only one small (c. 3 plants) population has been recorded in recent years. |
| 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): | 4. Autecology and pressures understood |
| Recovery potential/expectation: | Medium-high |
| National Monitoring Resource: | Structured - insufficient |
| Species Comments: | Only two sites, so the potential for a structured survey is high, but the species might potentially occur anywhere within the two reserves, and specialist survey skills required to differentiate it from the widespread and similar Luzula multiflora. |
Key Actions
Key Action 1
Proposed Action: Desk-based study focused on known factors controlling/affecting germination, seed ecology (including seed bank longevity and germination requirements), and longevity of individual plants.
Action targets: 4. Autecology and pressures understood
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 1 year
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Holme Fen and Woodwalton Fen
Comments: Desk-based study
Key Action 2
Proposed Action: Following Action 1, trial disturbance plots at key sites.
Action targets: 5. Remedial action identified
Action type: Habitat management
Duration: 2 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Holme Fen and Woodwalton Fen
Comments:
Key Action 3
Proposed Action: Establish a monitoring programme at both key sites. Consider raising plants ex situ for introduction, depending on results of trial disturbance plots.
Action targets: 6. Recovery solutions trialled
Action type: Scientific research
Duration: 3-5 years
Scale of Implementation: ≤ 5 sites
High priority sites: Holme Fen and Woodwalton Fen
Comments: Would suit a PhD study - there is very little known about the ecological requirements of this species, although there are many assumptions.
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.