I was so fed up of pulling out weeds in my garden – a £6 buy stopped them growing in the first place & improves my soil
A GARDENING expert has revealed how to drastically reduce the time spent trying to get rid of weeds.
Pollyanna Wilkinson shared her must-try tips for thriving borders without hours of work.
3
3
Wilkinson spoke about managing weeds with Jojo Barr in an episode of their podcast The Ins & Outs.
The conversation began when listener Tiff complained about the amount of time spent working on her garden.
'We recently bought a house and have inherited a large garden with well-established borders and a south-facing garden next to a field,' Tiff said.
'The garden brings me endless joy and I love nothing more than filling my house with lots of gorgeous flowers all year round, very lucky.
'However, all my husband and I seem to do is weed and repeat.
'Any top tips for keeping weeds at bay, is wood chip any good or is it just a matter of keeping on hoeing?'
Wilkinson said all of her clients hate weeding but it's impossible to avoid the tedious task.
She revealed there are two effective ways to minimise how often it must be done.
New borders will have more weeds than 'very established' ones because of the way weeds germinate.
1. Fill your borders
'The number one thing I say is just to make sure there are enough plants in your borders so the weeds don't have enough space to thrive,' she said.
'It drives me wild, you just can't get rid of it' pro gardener reveals the nightmare weed every UK home is at risk of
'A lot of people make the mistake of having quite gappy borders and then basically you've just got a soil bed sat there waiting for weeds to seed into them
'You can also look at having plenty of ground cover as well.
'It's about choosing the right plants, you're not just choosing things that are rising out of the soil and the soil beneath is bare.
'Make sure you've got things like hardy geraniums or grasses or oh my gosh so many different things pachysandras, vincas and all sorts of ground covers to basically drown them out.'
2. Add mulch
Wilkinson said the next step is having a 'nice, thick layer of mulch' to suppress the weeds by stopping the seeds from getting light.
She advised against using wood chips in favour of using a material that's finely ground.
'I prefer to use something like mushroom compost as a mulch, or basically anything really nice and fine,' she said.
'We don't want the big chunky like play bark that you put in a kid's play area on your borders, that's not the dream.
'Think how long that's going to take to break down and add anything to the soil as well."
Mushroom compost can be purchased from garden centres and online.
Nick Hamilton owner of Barnsdale Gardens has shared his favourite plants and flowers you should consider adding to your garden, borders and pots.
Tricyrtis
A spectacular plant that gives a real exotic feel to any garden with its orchid-like, spotted flowers giving the impression that this plant should be tender but it is 'as tough as old boots!'.
Penstemon
I love this plants genus of because most will flower all summer and autumn. They'll grow in sun or semi-shade in a well drained soil and produce a non-stop display of tubular flowers in an array of colours and colour combination to suit all tastes.
Luzula sylvatica 'Marginata'
With the evergreen leaves edged with yellow it's great asset is that it
will grow in sun or shade in any type of soil and is great as groundcover in the hardest spot to fill - dry shade.
Eryngium x zabelii 'Big Blue'
A stunning, nectar-rich plant that will feed the beneficial insects in your
garden. Leave the flowerheads once they have turned brown because they look stunning with winter frost and snow, extending the plant's interest period.
Sarcococca hookeriana 'Winter Gem'
If you need winter scent then look no further than this compact, evergreen shrub. The scent is stunning and the evergreen leaves create an excellent backdrop for the summer flowers.
Cornus sanguinea 'Anny's Winter Orange'
A dwarf version of 'Midwinter Fire' the very colourful stems create a stunning winter display, particularly on sunny days.
Rosa 'Noisette Carnee'
A very well-behaved climbing rose that is perfect for training over an arch, pergola or gazebo. The small, 'noisette' flowers are blush-pink and produce the most amazing clove scent constantly from June to November.
Sanguisorba hakusanensis 'Lilac Squirrel'
I've never seen a squirrel with a drooping, shaggy lilac tail, but this variety will give your garden an unusual and different look throughout summer. It does need a moisture retentive soil but will grow in sun or semi-shade.
Woodland Horticulture Mushroom Compost 60 Litres, for example, is £5.99 from Tates of Sussex Garden Centres.
As for what mulch does, it "suppressed weeds, improves the soil, and helps with moisture level"s so there's a myriad of reasons to use it.".
Wilkinson said many people use a membrane fabric to suppress weeds but they aren't a good option for plant borders because of how they rot.
'When you're trying to dig plants, if you're trying to put bulbs in a border it's an absolute nightmare,' she said.
'So, no I would much rather you do a nice thick layer of mulch than this cutting out of holes and putting things in.'
3
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Daily Mail
an hour ago
- Daily Mail
I like Aussies but there is one huge issue with your culture I just can't get past: 'Sorry if you're offended'
A Swedish-born former Australian resident in his 20s has made an observation about Aussie attitudes that has sparked a heated online discussion. The young man, who 'partially grew up' living and attending school in Queensland before moving back to Europe, shared his observation about the apparent lack of value Australians place on education and intellectual pursuits. Taking to Reddit, he shared his views in an 'Ask An Aussie' subreddit post titled: 'What is the cause of Australian anti-intellectualism?' 'I would like to begin by saying that I like Australia and Australians, and I hope I don't come across as offensive. This is just one aspect of Australian society,' he began. 'In my experience, people in Australia tend to not value education so much. 'When they do, it's usually because it leads to a higher-paying job. Knowledge for the sake of knowing is not really valued, the dominating idea being that education only matters if it can be capitalised on.' The lengthy post saw the man explain that he came to this conclusion after leaving Australia and moving back to Sweden, and later France. During his time attending school Down Under, the self-declared 'bookish' man said he 'often felt estranged from other students' on account of his thirst for learning. He added that he struggled to find like-minded 'people who were interested in literature, poetry and even politics'. 'Very few read books in their free time,' he added. The post concluded by asking Aussies to weigh in on this perceived anti-intellectual attitude and offer some explanations. The recent post quickly lit up with over 1,500 responses. Perhaps surprisingly, many were from Aussies who agreed with aspects of the original poster's sentiment. The reply that received the most upvotes surmised the issue as stemming from a broader Australian social attitude of wanting to fit in. The short but popular comment explained: 'In high school, it doesn't pay to be scholastic or otherwise different or you get mocked. Sad really, and this often carries forward into everyday life.' 'Too well spoken? Pronounce your words correctly? You might get bullied,' one replied. A different but related explanation was also suggested in regard to the value Australian culture places on sporting achievements. Many commenters highlighted that while academic prowess could sometimes be a source of ridicule during schooling years, Australian students were, however, encouraged to proudly excel at sports. One commenter said they were 'made fun of' at school for being 'studious and bad at sports'. Another raised the idea more broadly, writing in part that Australia 'prizes physical pursuits over intellectual ones'. However, many were at pains to explain that Australians do indeed hold value in the pursuit of education. The difference, however, is that many Australians are conscious not to show off for being 'too 'clue-y' or 'booksmart' because it projects an air of being 'an arrogant a***hole who is far too "up themselves"'. '[T]here's absolutely people around in Australia who enjoy intellectual pursuits, but keep low key about it,' read one reply. 'We have high rates of education, but we hate class distinction,' explained another response. 'If people feel like you are using jargon or bigger words than you need to, they will call you on it because they will assume you are putting on airs.' This also led to commentary about the pervasiveness of 'tall poppy syndrome' in Australian society, and how it discouraged those who were intellectually inclined from outwardly expressing these interests. 'I think a lot of Australian identity is shaped by the tall poppy syndrome and rebellion against elitism, which many Australians tie to intellectualism,' read part of one longer post. A financial argument also offered an interesting explanation for the perceived lack of value Australians place on a generalised pursuit of knowledge. 'Until recently you could get an extremely well-paying job in Australia with minimal, if any, education, mostly through mining. This led to a lot of people dismissing education as pointless, useless and expensive,' explained one commenter. Another agreed, writing: 'I've got mates without degrees or school-completion certificates who earn filthy money for mining companies, oil refineries etc.' 'The ability to earn money – lots of it – is valued much, much more highly than intelligence,' read part of another reply. But many commenters felt this attribute was actually something to 'love' about Australia, because it meant that 'unskilled workers can make good money and have a good life'. 'I think Australia tends to be fairly egalitarian,' one wrote. 'So in the same way we don't look up to intellectual jobs, we don't look down on trades or manual labour jobs.' To this point, even the original poster agreed that this was true of Australian society. Others pointed to the fact that while higher education was free in Sweden, in Australia university attracts huge fees, which has financial implications. 'Education is much cheaper in Europe. To get it here, you go into debt for a very long time. That means you need to get your money's worth,' one explained. 'Knowledge, for the sake of knowing, doesn't put food on the table or a roof over your head,' added another. Ultimately, many responders surmised that this perceived anti-intellectual attitude held by Australians was probably a result of a combination of the aforementioned factors. One response reflected: 'Intellectualism is considered 'navel-gazing' - sort of a self-indulgent waste of time. Others have mentioned tall-poppy syndrome, and I think that's partially true.' They concluded that this had created a feeling that 'non-productive' or 'non-capitalisable' styles of educational inquiry were 'frivolous'.
Times
2 hours ago
- Times
Surrogacy rules are outdated and heartless
Before the Scottish philosopher Adam Smith wrote The Wealth of Nations, he authored another book that's far less well known. In The Theory of Moral Sentiments, Smith argues that we humans have a natural gift for putting ourselves in other people's shoes and that this hardwired empathy helps shape our ethics. That idea feels right to me so, if I may, I'd like to tap into your sympathy by asking you to picture yourself in the following situation. Imagine you're a man whose wife was diagnosed with ovarian cancer a few years ago. Doctors were able to save her life by removing her womb and blasting her with radiation, but that treatment means she'll never carry a child. Before the gruelling medical interventions began, your wife's eggs were frozen — so now the disease is in remission, you have the chance to have the family you've dreamt of, but you'll have to go down the surrogacy route where someone else compassionately carries your baby for you. • Ms Rachel, the 'human Teletubby' driving British parents mad It takes a long time but you eventually find a surrogate via Facebook — a 33-year-old mum of four. An IVF clinic mixes your sperm with your partner's egg and implants the embryo into the surrogate's womb. After an agonising wait, you get a positive result on the pregnancy test. You're with your surrogate when you discover you're going to be a father for the first time, and you're at her side during the ultrasound scans as you see your baby growing. Finally the delivery date arrives and, when your daughter is born, you cradle her in your arms, convinced you'll never love anything, or anyone, this much again. But within hours of the birth — out of the blue — the surrogate tells you she has changed her mind and wants to keep your infant. Soon after, she leaves the hospital with your child and, eight agonising months later, your case is finally heard by a judge who rules that the surrogate is allowed to keep your baby. For ever. Can you imagine the devastation you'd feel if this happened to you? Shockingly, this nightmarish scenario — a surrogate being allowed to keep a child that is 100 per cent genetically yours — can happen in the UK because of a statutory framework rushed in by Margaret Thatcher's government in 1985. That year, a mother named Kim Cotton had carried an embryo for a couple who couldn't have a baby themselves. Surrogacy was a novel concept at the time, so this was big news. Cotton explained to the press that she was happy to be able to help people in need — it was an act of compassion. • NHS to offer whole genome sequencing to every newborn baby Reactionaries in Thatcher's Britain saw things differently and legislation was hastily passed that made surrogacy between consenting adults extraordinarily difficult. According to these antiquated rules, in Britain the surrogate is always the legal parent and the biological parents have to go through a long and uncertain judicial process to effectively 'adopt' their own offspring. If the newborn ends up in intensive care after birth or needs clinical treatment of any kind, the genetic parents have no formal say about what should happen. Our country's leading surrogacy lawyer Natalie Gamble aptly describes this as 'the final indignity'. As she puts it: 'After struggling so hard to have a much-loved child, the parents are then legal strangers to their baby at birth.' • Ministers put surrogacy reforms on back burner The negative consequences don't stop there. Under our outmoded regulations the views of surrogates are disregarded; they're not allowed to decide that the intended parents should be the lawful guardians; only the courts can make that call. This also creates complications for the surrogate's spouse, who is forced to assume legal parenthood and financial responsibility for a child that isn't theirs. Sadly, youngsters suffer as well. In Gamble's words, babies born via a gestational carrier are 'born into a legal black hole because UK law treats them as the children of the wrong person'. Small wonder that the majority of Brits who have to go down this route end up going overseas, in particular to progressive American states such as California. There, modern regulations mean surrogates have to pass rigorous medical, psychological and financial screening tests. And critically, in these US states, the courts decide at the start of the surrogacy journey who will be named as the parents, which minimises the risk of confusion or complications later down the line. This certainty is good for everyone and ensures that genetic parents can be treated as the rightful guardians from day one. This means they don't have to go through a stressful adoption-type application after the birth or worry that they won't be able to make hospital decisions on behalf of their son or daughter. We need a similarly commonsense approach here and, luckily, in recent years we've seen thoughtful and practical reform proposals put forward by the Law Commission of England and Wales, as well as the all-party parliamentary group on surrogacy. It would be a credit to Keir Starmer's government to follow these recommendations and overhaul our regressive laws, after successive Tory administrations timidly failed to do so. Of course, surrogacy only affects a tiny number (about 600 British babies are born via surrogacy a year), so a cynical political strategist might call this a 'third-term priority', which is Westminster-speak for 'no bloody way'. But basic fairness demands action is taken. As Adam Smith would say, we should trust that human sympathy means that the British public will be supportive, even if they're lucky enough never to have fertility issues themselves. Here's hoping our prime minister feels the same way.
The Guardian
2 hours ago
- The Guardian
Sudoku 6,941 easy
Click here to access the print version. Fill the grid so that every row, every column and every 3x3 box contains the numbers 1 to 9. To see the completed puzzle, buy the next issue of the Guardian (for puzzles published Monday to Thursday). Solutions to Friday and Saturday puzzles are given in either Saturday's or Monday's edition.
