2014 UK Orchids (1 Viewer)

[ladybee]

Dark Red Helleborines

It was back in 2010 that it was suggested we don't be too specific naming sites and that has been the way of things since. So l am just going to say that l have just been told that the best Derbyshire Dark Red Helleborine site has been totally devastated and there are no orchids left (or much else) caused by sheep getting in because a fence was flattened last year. I haven't yet seen it for myself and so wouldn't normally post but l trust the information.

 

[Dave Pearson]

I found seven Green-flowered Heleborines at the usual site near Winchester. All are still in bud but should flower soon (if at all)! Please stay on the gravel path to avoid trampling. They can be seen and photographed without walking on the vegetation. Thanks.

 

[leptochila]

Local BLH are just starting to come into flower; the pale plant was growing out in the open, the darker flowered one under a few isolated bushes.

Rich M

The first looks just like var. neerlandica! If it's not at Kenfig (and I don't think Kenfig would count as local for you would it?) then again, it really does indicate neerlandica is an eco-type.

Mike

 

[leptochila]

We went to see this small colony today and (without pretending to be experts) are of the same opinion as Muba. We examined the plants quite closely and the factors which led us to conclude that they were E.dunensis were (based largely on Harrap's key) :

1. The leaves were alternately positioned up the stem, broadly in two ranks.
2. The leaves were in the main held in a stiffish 45-ish degree angle.
3. The flowers were smaller than BLH and consistently of the same colouration.
4. The ovaries were NOT twisted.
5. The lip was recurved in the flowers which had already opened well.
6. There was some evidence of crumbling pollinia.

In addition we saw no indication of any BLH in the vicinity.
Our conclusion was strengthened by comparison with the Alyn Waters population which we had visited yesterday; so we were reasonably well-placed to make a comparison.

I have attached photos from today and one from yesterday - interested to see if anyone can spot the difference!

If this conclusion, which Mike has already tentatively supported, proves correct then it is a very nice find by Muba - a new record for a still not very common species. If it is not, then I think they should be called E.helleborine mubensis , as they do not seem to "key down" very well to the typical BLH characteristics. I suppose that to be really confident one would welcome the opinion of a Prof Richards or a Prof Bateman. Simon (Harrap)'s view would also be appreciated.

Martin and Elaine

PS Since posting this, Rich's BLH posting has just appeared, and makes an interesting comparison.

Hi Martin and Elaine

Superb pictures and I agree they are Dune Helleborine. I wouldn't commit to 100% sure without seeing the plants in the flesh (I refer specifically to the supposid Warburg Violet x Broad-leaved helleborine hybrid of last year!) but your photos are good enough to vote in favour. Excellent find by Steve (Muba)!

Mike

 

[leptochila]

Simon I value your openess and love your books but I hold the opposite view regarding how open we should be on forums such as this. You have only just joined this group but are already trying to alter how it runs. Its been very successful in helping its users in discovering like minded people, helped them to find orchids they are seeking and fulfilling their love for these fabulous plants, all without overly compromising a sites name. As you rightly state its easy to find sites by a bit of google (although not always!) but that is not the same as talking directly with someone who cares, can give you detailed instructions and share the fun of finding something you've been seeking from a day to a lifetime. That's communication. I feel that everyone on here shares the same values and thats worth a lot more that just glibly saying a site name just for the hell of it in the name of 'openness'.

I'm not surprised by your desire to be open with sites. There is justification for this, but only if this information gets to people who are able to help protect the site. That does mean we should be informing our local wildlife trust, local councils, and the local plant recorders. This is very valuable information for them to know. That's where site location should be fully revealed and documented, not on an open forum.

If you care to look back through this and other forums around the net, you will find site names. Even Ladle Hill has been named on here before you announced you've 'found it via Google'. I personally won't give site names on the forum as I prefer caution. Once location information is revealed on the net it will never be deleted. If users really want to know where I've been they can ask via a PM. Not a big deal in my opinion. I have frequently asked others and received positive replies which I have been very appreciative for. This personal communication all helps to generate a community feel to this forum.

As you rightly state photographers cause lots of damage to and around plants, especially to any seedling that maybe trying to grow. Those who are simply there for the image probably scour sites such as this one to get site names. By reducing the prevalence of such information we are all playing a small part in plant protection which, hopefully, will help the plants survive for the enjoyment of future generations.

There is no right nor wrong in this debate, some will think you are right and others will support me. Either way this forum has provided me with great enjoyment from both seeing what others have found, friends made and information received. Long may it continue.

Regards
Ian

Absolutely Ian. If it aint broke don't fix it. The community here has always been a welcoming one. I'm not sure where the fear of it being a closed 'club' comes from!

Mike

 

[rmielcarek]

The first looks just like var. neerlandica! If it's not at Kenfig (and I don't think Kenfig would count as local for you would it?) then again, it really does indicate neerlandica is an eco-type.

Mike

No Mike, Kenfig isn't local for me, these were at a site on the edge of the Mendips. The pale plant was growing out in the open amongst short grass. All the other BLH there grow under a few scattered shrubs.

Rich M

 

[leptochila]

No Mike, Kenfig isn't local for me, these were at a site on the edge of the Mendips. The pale plant was growing out in the open amongst short grass. All the other BLH there grow under a few scattered shrubs.

Rich M

There we go then. Those dark crinkly bosses and pale sickly green leaves would seem to be some sort of morphological response to a more full-sun position.

Mike

 

[Benjamin Ofield]

Thanks to everyone that helped with info on Bog orchids in the New forest, was first time I've seen Bog orchid could not believe how small they were! I thought Musk orchid was small!

 

[Bodhyfryd]

Hi Martin and Elaine

Superb pictures and I agree they are Dune Helleborine. I wouldn't commit to 100% sure without seeing the plants in the flesh (I refer specifically to the supposid Warburg Violet x Broad-leaved helleborine hybrid of last year!) but your photos are good enough to vote in favour. Excellent find by Steve (Muba)!

Mike

Thanks, Mike. Sean is hoping to visit the site later in the week. It will be interesting to see what he thinks.

Martin

 

[dsskipper]

I would be keen to be PM'd on this also. Thx. - Toby

I'd also be keen for some info.

Donal

 

[leptochila]

I'd also be keen for some info.

Donal

For all those asking for Norfolk Creeping Lady's-tresses details - post #761 by J Jones (Josh) would seem to be the place to start. Drop him a PM perhaps?

Mike

 

[JCL]

Still 33+ firmly closed Green-flowered Helleborines on a NW Kent roadside.

 

[Chris Hind]

The first of the Green-flowered Helleborines is in flower at Miltonrigg Wood, albeit a sickly specimen with very eaten leaves. The others growing in damper shady locations will be a while yet but certainly look better. Broad-leaved Helleborines there are in tight bud and still straightening.
At the Engine Lonning in Carlisle the Tyne Hells are looking good, in full flower and very numerous, certainly many more than at the sites I visited yesterday.
Chris

 

[prevell]

Bog orchid

Thanks to everyone that helped with info on Bog orchids in the New forest, was first time I've seen Bog orchid could not believe how small they were! I thought Musk orchid was small!

A good photo Ben, but did you not see any plants with bulbils on the leaves?

Peter

 

[Benjamin Ofield]

A good photo Ben, but did you not see any plants with bulbils on the leaves?

Peter

I can't say I noticed any, I didn't really look if I'm honest. Just looking back at some of my pictures of other plants I cant see any bulbils on any of the leaves.

Ben

 

[muba]

The first of the Green-flowered Helleborines is in flower at Miltonrigg Wood, albeit a sickly specimen with very eaten leaves. The others growing in damper shady locations will be a while yet but certainly look better. Broad-leaved Helleborines there are in tight bud and still straightening.
At the Engine Lonning in Carlisle the Tyne Hells are looking good, in full flower and very numerous, certainly many more than at the sites I visited yesterday.
Chris

The mention of very eaten leaves is a reflection of what I have seen locally. GFH seem to have been targeted for nibbling. What would have been a robust specimen at Alyn Waters had no flower spike and stumps for leaves. The Dune Helleborines were largely unscathed. Over half the GFH in Marford Quarry had suffered. If these leaves are so tasty I would expect them to appear in mixed salad leaves bags at your local supermarket soon.

 

[AdrianW]

E. leptochila just starting to come into flower in Surrey now (one plant had two florets out; but all others are still in bud).

E. helleborine all still in bud.

The stock are on Pewsey downs throughout the year as part of the management plan ... without this grazing regime there would be a rapid reduction in species diversity & one of the first plants to disappear would be Neotinea ustulata.

I know it needs to be grazed; it was the timing that was concerning me. Very good point about needing to manage the site for all species rather than the one though; I do tend to get a little bit too focussed on the orchids...

 

[joannacary]

Hi Joanna

The soil in all the Herefordshire sites is mainly acidic as Mike says. I'm without Internet at present so can't look up more info at present.

Sean

thanks Sean. I was afraid you were going to say that .... I was hoping to be able to rule out the little acidic patches in the Chiltern sites ..... hey ho! if you've got any more detailed soil information, could you email references for me to follow up? Many thanks, as ever

Joanna

 

[davidearlgray]

Simon I value your openess and love your books but I hold the opposite view regarding how open we should be on forums such as this. You have only just joined this group but are already trying to alter how it runs. Its been very successful in helping its users in discovering like minded people, helped them to find orchids they are seeking and fulfilling their love for these fabulous plants, all without overly compromising a sites name. As you rightly state its easy to find sites by a bit of google (although not always!) but that is not the same as talking directly with someone who cares, can give you detailed instructions and share the fun of finding something you've been seeking from a day to a lifetime. That's communication. I feel that everyone on here shares the same values and thats worth a lot more that just glibly saying a site name just for the hell of it in the name of 'openness'.

I'm not surprised by your desire to be open with sites. There is justification for this, but only if this information gets to people who are able to help protect the site. That does mean we should be informing our local wildlife trust, local councils, and the local plant recorders. This is very valuable information for them to know. That's where site location should be fully revealed and documented, not on an open forum.

If you care to look back through this and other forums around the net, you will find site names. Even Ladle Hill has been named on here before you announced you've 'found it via Google'. I personally won't give site names on the forum as I prefer caution. Once location information is revealed on the net it will never be deleted. If users really want to know where I've been they can ask via a PM. Not a big deal in my opinion. I have frequently asked others and received positive replies which I have been very appreciative for. This personal communication all helps to generate a community feel to this forum.

As you rightly state photographers cause lots of damage to and around plants, especially to any seedling that maybe trying to grow. Those who are simply there for the image probably scour sites such as this one to get site names. By reducing the prevalence of such information we are all playing a small part in plant protection which, hopefully, will help the plants survive for the enjoyment of future generations.

There is no right nor wrong in this debate, some will think you are right and others will support me. Either way this forum has provided me with great enjoyment from both seeing what others have found, friends made and information received. Long may it continue.

Regards
Ian

Releasing news about a Ghost Orchid wouldn't happen as the Gentlemen's club wouldn't allow it!!

Cheers,
Dave.

 

[davidearlgray]

thanks Sean. I was afraid you were going to say that .... I was hoping to be able to rule out the little acidic patches in the Chiltern sites ..... hey ho! if you've got any more detailed soil information, could you email references for me to follow up? Many thanks, as ever

Joanna

Hi Joanna, have you checked with the British Geologial survey place near Nottingham? As I think you can get maps of different counties to show what the soil types are for the region you are asking about?

Hope this helps?
Cheers,
Dave.