I have seen pictures of some climbers grown in fields, and they were fine - they just turned into giant mounds, definitely above the weeds. Depends on how big the rose normally gets, of course.

Jackie

Why not? Basically my own garden was just a large,emppty space with no structures,etc in it,and it is mostly filled with climbing roses! I build structures for them;even just three long, sturdy ,straight-ish branches or thick-ish rebar poles can be made into a quick rose te-pee support. When you plant them it would be wise to rip out the weeds in the area in which the rose is to be planted (when yiou're preparing the rose bed, that is),and then mulch around the newly planted rose,so it won't have to compete with the weeds while it is still young.Ramblers would be great,too! bart

Go for it! And when they get big, take lots of pictures and post them on HMF so everyone can see what the natural shape and size of some of these roses are.

When one is planning/choosing roses it is very helpful to see what the full growth will be like and there are so few pictures. The description says 10' and you get 15 photos of blooms and 2 of somebody's manicured arbor.

Catrose - you have hit on one of my pet peeves - 100 pictures of a "rose" showing only one bloom. If we are very lucky there will be one or two showing part of a bush. What is needed, of course, is full bush shots of a mature rose bush - that is the only way to figure out what it really looks like. And since people post from all over the world, we need several of these from different climates.

Jackie

Hear,hear!!! that annoys me too,SO much ;on HMF,for example, it is so typical to see out of16 photos,15 will be close-up shots of an individual bloom,and if you're lucky,the 16th will be of one branch of the plant with flowers on it. Rose catalogues are no better. Yet,in my opinion,habit is such an important factor when picking out which roses I want for my garden,and knowing the size of a given climber doesn't tell you much,in a way- ; Is it a lax-growing one,with a graceful, rambler-style habit,that would be good for training on arches,or as a weeper/cascader? or is it a stiff grower,that will need a sturdy frame in order to train branches horizontally? It's such an essentail factor when deciding on placement,etc; probably more important than the appearence of an individual bloom! Vintage Gardens' site is so precious because they do provide an idea of the growing habit;I sure hope they will maintain their site as a reference/information thing,even if they don't sell plants any more,because this feature is so precious and,sad to say,unique!!! bart

I've done that with a few climbers planted on two birdposts in my yard. I don't do anything to the roses - no fertilizer, no spraying and no pruning (only exception is if there's a broken cane). They've done really well. One post: John Davis/Laguna (pink/fuschia combo). Other post: Darlow's Enigma/Rambling Red (white/red combo). Give it a try.

Why is the field full of "weeds"? What do you mean by "weeds"?

Are there any native grasses or plants that belong in that field? I would encourage natives and then yes of course try some roses. Natives are going to better support native insect & bird populations.

Unless Guelph is further west than I think it is (and I have been there - just not this century) the native ecosystem is forest. Keeping the trees out is going to be necessary for the roses, and is going to require a certain amount of old-fashioned weeding.

If trees grow in the field,you can train ramblers up them;I see no conflict,though of course you wouldn't want too many of them...bart