Monty Don urges households with wisteria to do '6-inch' pruning task
Wisteria can add instant charm and elegance to your garden - however, Monty recommends completing this one important pruning task now to stop it growing out of control
Easily identifiable for their long, draping flowers, wisteria add a mysterious, elegant atmosphere to any garden. But if you want them to flower to their full potential, you should take care to prune them in June.
Wisteria typically blossoms in late spring in early summer. In the UK, this usually means you will see their distinctive purple blossoms come to fruition in May or June. They also release a delectable scent, which can range from musky and slightly spicy to sweet. It's also a fast-growing climbing plant, making it a perfect decoration for walls or fences.
However, there is a level of maintenance involved in keeping your wisteria healthy and flourishing. Gardening expert and BBC presenter Monty Don says June is the perfect time to prune them.
This is because it allows new flowers to emerge. Monty wrote in his blog: 'Wisteria produces its flowers on new growth, which in turn emerges from spurs off the main shoots.
He continued: 'When they have finished flowering – and for most of us that is around the middle of June – is the best time to prune all this year's new shoots back to a spur leaving no more than about 6 inches of growth.'
Cutting wisteria shoots by six inches should be enough to keep new growth close to the main vine. It also should clear away unwanted shoots that risk ruining the look of your garden.
Likewise, gardeners should also take this opportunity to tidy up the entire plant. This includes trimming and tying away any loose, trailing shoots.
If you're unsure over how hard to prune your plant, Monty advises to err on the side of 'cutting too lightly'. After all, you will have other opportunities to prune your plant.
In the new year, you can prune again after the foliage has begun to die back. Monty says you should reduce each side shoot to 'just 2 or 3 inches.'
Pruning also helps to avoid your wisteria plant into a big mass of woody tissue and foliage. Or, worse, growing out of control and damaging your walls or fences.
It also poses a sinister threat to other plants if left unchecked. Wisteria can quickly wrap itself around surrounding plants, effectively choking them.
Other tips for caring for wisteria is ensuring they are placed in well-drained soil, as they dislike too much moisture. Equally, they should be left to grow in a sheltered, sunny spot.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
North Wales Chronicle
16 minutes ago
- North Wales Chronicle
MI5 apologises unreservedly to High Court for ‘failings and errors'
In 2022, then-Attorney General Suella Braverman went to the court in London to stop the BBC airing a programme that would name him. An injunction was made to prevent the corporation disclosing information likely to identify the man, referred to only as 'X', though Mr Justice Chamberlain said the BBC could still air the programme and the key issues without identifying him. At a hearing in February, the court heard that part of the written evidence provided by MI5 was false. On Tuesday, Sir James Eadie KC, representing the Attorney General, made an 'unreserved apology and contrition on behalf of MI5' for the incorrect evidence that was provided. He added: 'I am not here to seek to excuse or diminish the seriousness of that position. 'Everyone from the Director General onwards acknowledges the seriousness of what has occurred.' The written witness statement said the Security Service had maintained its policy of neither confirming nor denying (NCND) the identities of intelligence sources. However, the BBC said MI5 disclosed X's status to one of its reporters, but then said it had kept to the NCND policy. Sir James said there had been internal investigations since, and the 'first and most obvious conclusion' led to the 'unequivocal apology'. He added that there had been failings that have been 'properly identified' by the investigations. Sir James also said that criticism had been made that records of conversations with the press, about this subject matter, had not been created and maintained 'despite the obvious, clear and serious importance of doing so'. He added that the creation of contemporaneous documents was the 'best guard' against errors being made and that lessons had been learned. Sir James said the court can be 'properly satisfied' a full investigation had taken place, and it had concluded that the 'errors had not been deliberate' and that 'there had been no deliberate misleading or lying'. He also said there had been proper accountability for the errors, including in public, 'to the maximum extent possible'. Jude Bunting KC, for the BBC, told the court on Tuesday that the person – person B – who gave the false evidence did 'deliberately and repeatedly lie'. He continued that the evidence also suggests that there was a 'widespread' understanding within MI5 that this person had departed from NCND. Mr Bunting added that person B had departed from NCND in a way which was 'detailed and surprising, and that he had only been authorised to stray from the policy when talking to a 'trusted MI5 source'. The hearing before the Lady Chief Justice, Baroness Carr, Dame Victoria Sharp and Mr Justice Chamberlain, who will decide what action should be taken against MI5, is due to conclude on Tuesday.
Western Telegraph
31 minutes ago
- Western Telegraph
BBC granted time to consider appeal in Gerry Adams case before paying all costs
Mr Adams took the BBC to court over a 2016 episode of its Spotlight programme, and an accompanying online story, which he said defamed him by alleging he sanctioned the killing of former Sinn Fein official Denis Donaldson, for which he denies any involvement. On Friday, a jury at the High Court in Dublin found in his favour and awarded him 100,000 euros (£84,000) after determining that was the meaning of words included in the programme and article. The BBC will also have to pay Mr Adams's legal costs. However, the broadcaster was granted a stay on paying out the full costs and damages to allow it time to consider whether to lodge an appeal. Former Sinn Fein president Gerry Adams (Brian Lawless/PA) The stay was subject to paying half the damages (50,000 euros or £42,000) and 250,000 euros (£210,000) towards solicitors' fees. Eoin McCullough SC, for the broadcaster, told trial judge Mr Justice Alexander Owens on Tuesday that he was applying for a stay pending a decision on whether to take an appeal. He said his client had not determined if it would appeal, but added that he was seeking a stay until the end of the appeal period. In making its decision, the jury also found the BBC's actions were not in good faith and the corporation had not acted in a fair and reasonable way. When asked by the judge for what grounds an appeal could be taken, Mr McCullough said the court had rejected applications by the defence on matters put to the jury relating to Section 26 of the Defamation Act. In particular, he questioned the decision to reject an application to withdraw the question of 'good faith' to the jury – and the order in which that question was asked of the members. The jury was asked the good faith question before making a decision on whether the publication was fair and reasonable. Mr McCullough said it was inevitable that the jury would find against him on the matter of fair and reasonable action once it had already found against him on good faith. Mr Justice Alexander Owens agreed with counsel that there may be grounds for an appeal on the fact that the jury was first asked to consider whether the actions were in good faith before considering whether the actions were fair and reasonable. Tom Hogan SC, for Mr Adams, said that if the court was going to grant a stay, it should be on the basis of something being paid towards the award. Mr Justice Alexander Owens granted the stay subject to the conditions that 50,000 euros be paid towards damages and 250,000 euros towards the solicitors' fees. However, this can also be appealed against. Mr McCullough had raised other potential grounds for appeal, including the court's decision not to allow Mr Donaldson's daughter to give another 'version' of matters given in evidence by the family's former solicitor Ciaran Shiels. He also said an appeal may be grounded on the exclusion of the evidence of Austin Stack and historian Eunan O'Halpin. He said an appeal could further be grounded on the defendants being excluded from taking on the issue of whether Mr Adams was in the IRA, arguing that this could be put forward as significant acts of misconduct which would speak towards reputation. Mr Adams denies being a member of the IRA. Mr McCullough also raised comments by the judge which referred to newspaper reports about Mr Adams that were called upon during cross-examination as 'rot' and 'blather'. He said that based on all of these issues, the jury determination of a 100,000 euro quantum for damages was itself unsustainable, further stating that the circulation of the programme and article was 'very small' and combined with a 'very damaged reputation'. Mr Hogan said he could not say that there were not some points that were arguable, but added he did not want to 'fight the appeal now'. He said there was a 'very significant inequality of arms in this case' and questioned whether the application was strategic. He said an appeal had to be brought on a bona fide basis. Mr McCullough said it was 'surprising' if not a 'little frustrating' to hear a suggestion that he was acting short of good faith. He said all he had said was that his client had not made up its mind and that any appeal should be allowed to proceed in the usual way. He had argued that it may be difficult and complicated to get the amounts paid out back should he prevail on appeal. Mr Justice Alexander Owens said he was 'not really persuaded' on the grounds of the appeal, other than the order of the questions on 'good faith' and 'fair and reasonable'. He made the order of the payment of partial damages and costs. It is open to the BBC to seek a further stay against that payment at the Court of Appeal. Last week, the director of BBC Northern Ireland Adam Smyth said the broadcaster has insurance and 'makes financial provision for ongoing and anticipated legal claims'. Separately, the counsel discussed whether the article – which remains online – could be geoblocked in the Republic of Ireland. On the issue of seeking an injunction, Mr Hogan said he had been discussing the matter with Mr McCullough and that it may be technologically possible. He added that there had been a lot of talk over the weekend over BBC services being blocked in the Republic of Ireland. Mr Justice Alexander Owens replied: 'I heard that, I don't imagine that will happen.' The judge questioned what jurisdiction he had to make an order on the BBC, which is abroad. He added that it had been put to the jurors that he would not be able to make such an order and that their award of damages was the remedy on the matter. Mr Hogan agreed that it was not a matter to be decided on Tuesday.
Leader Live
32 minutes ago
- Leader Live
MI5 apologises unreservedly to High Court for ‘failings and errors'
In 2022, then-Attorney General Suella Braverman went to the court in London to stop the BBC airing a programme that would name him. An injunction was made to prevent the corporation disclosing information likely to identify the man, referred to only as 'X', though Mr Justice Chamberlain said the BBC could still air the programme and the key issues without identifying him. At a hearing in February, the court heard that part of the written evidence provided by MI5 was false. On Tuesday, Sir James Eadie KC, representing the Attorney General, made an 'unreserved apology and contrition on behalf of MI5' for the incorrect evidence that was provided. He added: 'I am not here to seek to excuse or diminish the seriousness of that position. 'Everyone from the Director General onwards acknowledges the seriousness of what has occurred.' The written witness statement said the Security Service had maintained its policy of neither confirming nor denying (NCND) the identities of intelligence sources. However, the BBC said MI5 disclosed X's status to one of its reporters, but then said it had kept to the NCND policy. Sir James said there had been internal investigations since, and the 'first and most obvious conclusion' led to the 'unequivocal apology'. He added that there had been failings that have been 'properly identified' by the investigations. Sir James also said that criticism had been made that records of conversations with the press, about this subject matter, had not been created and maintained 'despite the obvious, clear and serious importance of doing so'. He added that the creation of contemporaneous documents was the 'best guard' against errors being made and that lessons had been learned. Sir James said the court can be 'properly satisfied' a full investigation had taken place, and it had concluded that the 'errors had not been deliberate' and that 'there had been no deliberate misleading or lying'. He also said there had been proper accountability for the errors, including in public, 'to the maximum extent possible'. Jude Bunting KC, for the BBC, told the court on Tuesday that the person – person B – who gave the false evidence did 'deliberately and repeatedly lie'. He continued that the evidence also suggests that there was a 'widespread' understanding within MI5 that this person had departed from NCND. Mr Bunting added that person B had departed from NCND in a way which was 'detailed and surprising, and that he had only been authorised to stray from the policy when talking to a 'trusted MI5 source'. The hearing before the Lady Chief Justice, Baroness Carr, Dame Victoria Sharp and Mr Justice Chamberlain, who will decide what action should be taken against MI5, is due to conclude on Tuesday.
