You make a good point about the Peggy Rockefeller list. I looked and looked for an updated list on their site but there wasn't one. My roses certainly were healthier the first year or two then they were later.

Prairemoon,

He took photos of the roses for the catalogs, if they had a new introduction, it might be still in France for one breeder. They would fly in boxes and boxes for him to put together the best for the catalog images.

As far as color, while I would like to think the rose developers and photographers would never adjust the color radically to sell a rose, every time I look at this ad I have to wonder. I can tell you I have never seen a photo of Burgundy Iceberg looking like "purple iceberg" other than this ad. Maybe there is a place it is this deep purple??

If you are only 4 hours from the Peggy Rockefeller garden, it might be worth while to go and look at them for yourself. One thing about gardening, personal taste can make a rose that is perfect for one person a bad rose for another, seeing them in person can help you see how you feel about them.

Here is a link that might be useful: Burgundy Iceberg

This post was edited by Kippy-the-Hippy on Fri, Nov 8, 13 at 10:03

Roses are trial & error to me.
I like roses that bloom near non-stop and roses that the canes are winter hardy without much damage.
I'm in a blackspot prone area so I have shovel pruned a lot of roses for one reason or another.
But I took pics and still enjoyed those roses while they were here... Just enjoyed them in a different way. lol
I still enjoy looking at those older pics... :-)

I can say my photos on HMF are real life.
WWhat you see is what you get...lol

Kippy, thanks for more clarity on why they brought roses over from France, makes more sense. And I know it is hard to get a photograph that truly represents the true color. I have a hard time with that in my own garden at times.

I was just thinking that too, I should try to get down to the PRRGarden next year and take a look and I'm sure we could find someone to ask questions too.

Jim, it seems it is trial and error for most of us. :-)

"If I understand you correctly, you had a collection of 3,000 roses being sprayed with fungicides and after you stopped spraying there were only 15% of your collection that could function without the fungicide? So, what did you do? Did you end up getting rid of a lot of roses?

Thats correct: no more than 15% of the 3000 cultivars I grew were sustainable in my garden without "life support" chemistry. What did I do? I gradually removed the most conspicuous losers (notably the older HTs and Floribundas, which were the worst. Good old 'Soleil d'Or' was a tragic mess once fungicides were stopped, which will come as a surprise to no-one, I'm sure), and watched for a couple of years to see what else happened. Some persisted/hung on and survived from year to year, while others were so heavily impacted by leaf loss/disease that they quickly dwindled to twigs and eventually died. Many of my beloved Austins fell into the latter category; the first to croak was 'Mayor of Casterbridge' which went from a ten foot tall pillar of pink heaven to a couple of bloomless 10" twigs in a matter of three years. Its long dead now. 'Sharifa Asma' hangs on still, although in a much more compromised state. It leafs out in April, but by June the foliage is gone, and it regrows a new round of leaves. Lather, rinse, repeat. It chugs along bravely, naively - managing a few blooms here and there amid half-naked canes. That is about as good as any of the Austins perform here, sans fungicide.

Are you still trying new varieties?

No. I'm still working to exorcise the failing roses from the garden. Adding new varieties is beyond reasonable, for me.

And what part of the country are you growing them?

The Pacific Northwest, zone 8a. Mild, forgiving winters, mild, dry summers. Heavy disease pressure during the spring flush period.

With the Kordes roses, do you mean that some of their newer introductions have not proven to be blackspot resistant?

I have no idea about newer Kordes roses; I have not purchased a Kordes variety in over a decade, so I have no clue how newer roses perform here.

That’s a shame about the English roses. So many people, I’m sure, would love them to be blackspot resistant. Are there David Austin roses that you have not grown yet?"

The most recent Austin roses I bought was 'Benjamin Britten', and that was some years ago, as I'm sure you realize from its introduction date. It hung on for four years and was finally removed about two years ago, as it had quickly dwindled down to a lifeless stump. I suppose 'William Shakespeare 2000' is from the same period, and although it too is severely compromised (often losing most of its foliage, with the resulting loss of vigor), it chugs along as an 18" shrublet and manages a few nice blooms each Spring (but rarely any thereafter). My experience has shown me that there is no point in trying any more Austin roses, since not one of them has proven truly sustainable in my climate unless sprayed.

When it comes to David Austin rose catalogs and new introduction notices, I have adopted Lisa Simpson's advice; "Just don't look, just don't look!"

Here is a link that might be useful: Just Don't Look

"Kim, thinking about what you said about the information about which race effects which rose that wont be distributed until who ever did the testing decides to, Im wondering if there would be a resistance to provide the public with that information, because maybe it would have a lot of economic consequences to rose growers."

Not really "resistance" to releasing the information, Prairiemoon. These studies are often undertaken with research grants and educational theses. I am not certain which this particular information is. Until the information is published as the owner intends, it is considered intellectual property and the owner has the right to utilize it as he/she feels appropriate. I honestly don't believe there is any conspiracy involved. As there were no chemicals involved in the trials, nothing regarding any effectiveness, or lack of it, is involved. Knock Out types were also included, and, not unexpectedly, many of them proved healthier and more resistant than most others. Most of the surprises were roses thought to be "resistant" which proved not to be as resistant as originally considered. I wish I could remember more specific examples, but there were also a few more pleasant surprises. I'm sure once the papers are published and any other intended uses are accomplished, the results will be more generally known.

"Good analogy about the flu."

Thank you! I'm glad it helped.

"As far as how this relates to each gardener finding roses that stay he althy in their garden, how specific do you need to be about your location?"

Until it's possible to determine which strains exist where, I don't think that can accurately be answered. They may cover vast areas so someone a thousand miles away may experience the same types as your area does, or they may be much more localized. I honestly couldn't guess. I would think, though, the closer the other location and the more closely it resembles your conditions, the more comparable the results should be to what you should be able to expect.

"I live in eastern Massachusetts. Pickering Nursery and Palatine Nurseries are in Ontario Canada, which is 10 hours north of me. They offer a list of disease resistant roses, but I believe they are passing along information about what others have reported about the roses in their locations, and not necessarily what grows healthy in Ontario. So is that list helpful to me?"

My impression is they may be reporting what has been reported to them, but I would also suspect they are also including their own observation and experience with very many of their roses. Pickering has stated they have discontinued those roses which required "pesticide" use, which in their terminology included fungicides, carrying only those which are healthier for them without treatment. They had to as their government has banned those chemicals to be used on ornamentals. Palatine is also Canadian, therefore also subject to the chemical ban. Have they reported discontinuing less resistant varieties, also? I don't know. Perhaps those Pickering found less resistant aren't as unhealthy where Palatine is? Perhaps Palatine isn't as demanding as Pickering about resistance? I don't know. But, without knowing how widespread the strains of black spot are, without trying the particular rose where you are, how could you know for certain?

"The other location for roses near me, is the Peggy Rockefeller Garden in NYC that is about 4 hrs south of me. They are growing roses in their now no spray garden and list their 100 top performers with a numerical grade. A lot of Kordes roses on that list. I would assume that list would be a great place to start for me. All four locations would be considered in the Northeast. Or do I actually need to know what is growing healthy in Massachusetts?"

Again, how would any of us know how widespread the particular strains of the fungi are, or where the various strains overlap? My impression would be the closer to you the information originates, the potentially greater the accuracy about what YOU might expect. Of course, I could be wrong, but that seems the most logical to me.

"Then back to cultural practices, I understand what you and Jeri are talking abo ut with the pruning. It makes sense that the rose would be healthier left to grow. Im just a little confused about how I ended up thinking I should be pruning roses, even with the blackspot foliage aside. Im pretty sure there is a lot of information floating around instructing you to prune every year, isnt there?"

Of course! Search back here on GW and you'll find numerous examples of the various "theologies" regarding pruning, fertilizing, spraying or not spraying, etc. There was even an outright flame war over pruning here way back in the "Dark Ages". And, of course, what you must do to accommodate your climate is going to trump a lot of that. What good does it do to tightly hold to "thou shalt not prune" when you MUST prune to winter protect your plants? As with anything else, you have to view all advice through your climate and condition filters. Of course you should experiment with anything and everything you find intriguing to determine what is going to work best for you. And, of course, what Jeri, I or anyone else in a longer, less serve cold weather areas recommend may or may not work for you at all, but hopefully, the basic botany of it might help suggest massages to you which may help explain what you observe and experience and help guide you to how to change what you find unsatisfactory.

"So is this a new direction in guidance for cultural practices?"

Yes, and no. It's probably been around not quite as long as the "garden legend" ARS information about needing to always whack everything to the nubs for exhibition pruning. What worked in Edwardian and Victorian England with the HPs and Bourbons, including what type of "clay" roses prefer and how to plant, fertilize and winter protect has been plagiarized and blindly repeated by so many "garden writers" who honestly knew little more than what they lifted from previous "experts" until it's become Gospel, covering every rose type in every location. You've read it, we all have. It works for some roses, in some places, but not everywhere. Just like the suggestion not to whack every rose, every year likely will. What if you have to snow prune to prevent heavier snow from breaking the plants? How about if your have to prune them to a foot every year to protect them? Everything has to be tweaked to fit where you are, what you grow and how you are willing to grow them to your satisfaction.

"I think I have a lot of misconceptions along these lines."

We all have, and do. Observation and interaction usually leads to changes in methodologies.

"Then there is the fact that in the Northeast, often you get dieback every spring so that the weather is actually pruning the rose and not you."

Precisely. Something we, in less severe climates, seldom have to contend with. However, many of us experience severe heat pruning some of our plants which you (hopefully) should never have to endure.

"But in my case, the rose is getting pruned back in spring normally with the weather and then I do it again in June, so that is even worse."

Logically, that would seem the case, wouldn't it?

"By modern roses does that mean anything other than old garden roses? And couldnt the same thing be said about old garden roses, that they store their nutrients in their canes?"

Deciduous roses traditionally move huge portions of their sap to the roots so when top growth is damaged, eaten or destroyed by animals or weather, there is that store of resources to enable the rebound when conditions require or enable it. Evergreen roses tend to store more of those reserves in the top growths as there is no need to protect them from massive plant losses during colder weather. Many evergreen roses are indigenous to climates where they are actually more actively growing during "winter" as that is when they actually get their rains. That's why Teas, Chinas and their descendents flower so heavily in winter to spring and go more summer dormant. Does that give you an idea how confused some plants can become when the climate in which they are thrust doesn't agree with what their genes tell them to do? What surprises me is how successful many of them actually are where I wouldn't expect they should succeed.

It's less a question of old versus modern and more between once flowering and repeat flowering; deciduous versus evergreen. Once flowering roses tend to be more arctic hardy than repeat flowering types. Genetically, they are better suited to shorter, later "spring-summer" climates. Their foliage is generally shorter lived, with shorter juvenile periods and faster slides into "senility" to accommodate the shorter, faster "growing seasons" than evergreen types. Many once flowering OGRs (and moderns) which are totally bullet-proof in shorter season, harsher winter climates are disease prone and short-lived in the "Land of Endless Summer".

"Yes, I can see how my habit of pruning back to the ground in June was hurting the rose, but the fact that the winter cold often does that in the spring is a fact of life in New England for the most part. Although Im sure some ros es dont die back to the ground every spring, either."

True. You might experience a number of years when there is little to no dieback, then get hit with more severe episodes (much like the extremes in summers much of the country is enduring).

"Are you also saying that once my roses were pruned back hard, that they will always be weak? Even if I changed my pruning habits?"

Not necessarily. If the particular plant or variety experiences lack of vigor due to its genetics, mitigating cultural or climatic issues, unsuitability for the climate, virus infection, etc. then that plant may remain weak. Barring any of those, once proper pruning is started, the rose should respond appropriately.

"With climate change, our summers are increasingly more hot and humid, so I would assume our pressure from blackspot is too."

That sounds reasonable. Here, they are becoming hotter and drier, reducing many disease issues and pressure, except for water induced rust and mildew. Those are on a steady increase. I am increasingly observing it, even on varieties previously unaffected by the issues. Interesting, instructive and VERY unsettling. Kim

Trospero, I can only imagine what an ordeal this has been to lose so many of your roses, not to mention the amount of work to change your garden to such an extent. I see I have nothing to complain about and much sympathy for your losses.

I would have to agree with your link. Very funny….lol. You would need a sense of humor in that situation. I am going to have to take that approach as well.

Thank you so much for sharing your experiences and taking the time to answer my questions. It has been quite an education and an inspiration as well. I look forward to hearing more about how it is all working out as you go along.

Just a quick post - very busy here. But trust me, there is so much MORE to discuss given the contributions since my last post.

I want to thank YOU, prairiemoon2, for your post and this subsequent thread. As someone who reflects on information that's presented to me and weighs it, this thread has been one of the most thought provoking and therefore one of the most valuable threads I have EVER read on this forum. You are also to be commended for your ability to process the information you receive. Your "questioning attitude" is EXTRAORDINARY.

I'd also like to quickly give kudos and thanks to

trospero for:
all that CLEARLY honest documented experience.

jerijen for:
"We don't any of us much care what is disease-free on the other end of the continent. We want to know what is disease-resistant for US, where WE garden."

mad_gallica for:
"once you cross the Appalachians"

And to dublinbay for the closing paragraph in dublinbay's prior post.

That proportion - 85% disease-y rubbish, vs 15% decent plants sounds about right to me - out of just over 120 roses, I am taking a mere 20 to my new garden, most of which are species or very close to species roses. I am partially disenchanted with dodgy roses and absolutely not prepared to put them on elevated treatment plans....and also feel that many of them will have no place in a woodland setting (although I am looking forward to trying all those huge, once flowering ramblers which were far too big for my old garden or allotment).
Out of interest , here is what I am taking - either via cuttings or transplants.
Hybrid Musks: Jacqueline Humery, Sibelius, Moonlight, Pleine de Grace
Climbers/ramblers: Splendens, Nastarana, Goldfinch, Tolstoi
Species: Pomifera duplex, nutkana plena, moyessi, californica plena, primula, cantabridgiensis, Amy Robsart, glauca
Others: Hebe's Lip, Double White, Darlows Enigma, Golden Wings, Aimee Vibert

A few are going to my daughter and the rest, who cares anymore.

I want really good plants and would rather have a few great ones than dozens of mediocre plants.....

I want really good plants and would rather have a few great ones than dozens of mediocre plants.....

As we face more water restrictions, I find that so true--I probably get 80% of my rose joy from 20% of my roses.

Hi Kim,

“I honestly don't believe there is any conspiracy involved.”

I was just wondering I guess that someone who was selling a rose that ended up testing as not resistant might expect sales to fall off. Not that it was a conspiracy. I’m sure there will be more and more information becoming available along these lines.

“My impression is they may be reporting what has been reported to them, but I would also suspect they are also including their own observation and experience with very many of their roses. “

I was thinking I can ask Pickering when I call to order if they are using their own experiences when they produce their list and for more specific information about how something grows for them. That is very encouraging that they have discontinued using chemicals, I didn’t realize it had been a ban and it certainly adds more weight to choosing them as a supplier for me. And Palatine as well.

“My impression would be the closer to you the information originates, the potentially greater the accuracy about what YOU might expect.”

So, the bottom line is that people who live in my area who have had success with a rose is the best way to determine something that will do well for me and then starting with a list of disease resistant roses and trying what I like would be the reasonable next option, to see what works for me. That actually is okay with me and even if roses are visitors for a few years and end up shovel pruned, understanding what to expect and that there really isn’t some magic information that would make choosing more reliable, takes some of the frustration out of it for me.

“What if you have to snow prune to prevent heavier snow from breaking the plants? How about if your have to prune them to a foot every year to protect them? Everything has to be tweaked to fit where you are, what you grow and how you are willing to grow them to your satisfaction.”

That’s true. I guess what it comes down to is learning as you go, observing, thinking and experimenting until you have a process that works for you.

“Precisely. Something we, in less severe climates, seldom have to contend with. However, many of us experience severe heat pruning some of our plants which you (hopefully) should never have to endure.”

I have not heard of severe heat pruning. That doesn’t sound like fun at all. I’m sure climate change is not helping.

“Does that give you an idea how confused some plants can become when the climate in which they are thrust doesn't agree with what their genes tell them to do? What surprises me is how successful many of them actually are where I wouldn't expect they should succeed.”

I have never grown a Tea or a China so I have not personally seen their tendency to flower in winter/early spring and go dormant in summer. Yes, it is amazing actually that they have adapted as well as they have.

“It's less a question of old versus modern and more between once flowering and repeat flowering; deciduous versus evergreen.”

That makes it much easier to understand.

“Once flowering roses tend to be more arctic hardy than repeat flowering types. Genetically, they are better suited to shorter, later "spring-summer" climates.”

Which is where I am. So, adding some once flowering roses is going with what is designed to work in my climate and repeat flowering roses are going to be swimming against the tide to some extent.

“True. You might experience a number of years when there is little to no dieback, then get hit with more severe episodes (much like the extremes in summers much of the country is enduring).”

Another good point, one year is not the same as the next and the extreme weather seems to be becoming more common.

“Barring any of those, once proper pruning is started, the rose should respond appropriately.”

Great, thanks.

“I am increasingly observing it, even on varieties previously unaffected by the issues. Interesting, instructive and VERY unsettling. Kim”

I agree, very unsettling.

Once again, I appreciate all the time you have taken to answer my questions. I’ve really enjoyed this thread. So much great information here. Thanks very much!!

"I want really good plants and would rather have a few great ones than dozens of mediocre plants....."

"As we face more water restrictions, I find that so true--I probably get 80% of my rose joy from 20% of my roses."

TRUTH TRUTH!! Another factor is that, as we age, we probably want fewer roses, but roses that are care-free.

Jeri

I don't want to start an argument, but I've been gardening for over 35 years and most of it has occurred in the colder regions (ice and snow in the winter), and I have never engaged in any of the following pruning practices--in fact, I've never even heard a rumor of anyone doing any of the following:

What good does it do to tightly hold to "thou shalt not prune" when you MUST prune to winter protect your plants?
. . . .
What if you have to snow prune to prevent heavier snow from breaking the plants? How about if your have to prune them to a foot every year to protect them?

Pruning to "winter protect"? "snow-pruning"? "pruning to a foot to protect them" in winter?

I am trying really hard not to spew forth what I think about such ideas, but I don't believe those are accepted practices anywhere in snowland--unless maybe you are talking about once-bloomers which, I admit, I know nothing about. But if that is what you are talking about, please be explicit. I really don't want to have to spend the next couple years answering posts by newbies on this forum about how to do a proper "snow-prune" or how to prune to "winter-protect." That is total nonsense--and that is the nicest thing I can say about this latest false mythology.

I apologize for being so upset. If I'm wrong, I'll apologize for that also, but I must wonder how my roses managed to survive over 30 years without "snow protection"!!!

On the other hand, I have lost a few roses to excessive heat and drought in the summertime. I've never lost a rose to snow and cold--as long as I planted only winter hardy roses (which is what I do). If people are trying to grow southern roses in the land of ice and snow, that is their own fault!

OK--done ranting. That one set me off, however. And I will apologize if someone can show me that I was wrong.

Kate

Hi Kate, I'm sorry to have upset you so! Definitely not my intention. I am not advocating any of that, simply reporting some of the "cultural methods" I have had presented to me by a surprising number over the past thirty-plus years. As I stated, I have never had to deal with snow or "arctic" weather gardening. If you go back through the ARS magazines of the past decades, you will find several articles (with photos) of "winter protection" requiring rather harsh pruning so the plants fit under the protection boxes. Admittedly, those were highly likely methods devised to permit growing HT's in climates for which they were particularly unsuited. "Snow pruning" has been suggested to prevent unnecessary breakage due to too heavy snow build-up. Again, something with which I have no personal experience, and only mentioned to demonstrate how not pruning much might not be suitable for conditions which might require more severe methods.

I can believe your stated successes and results. You have explored, experimented, paid attention to what those roses have taught you so your collection consists of those which are properly suited for your climate, conditions and cultural style. I hope nothing from this thread presents you with the dreaded questions in the future. Believe me, I can commiserate! I have very often fielded many of those types over the years on line and in person, though skewed to hot weather growing instead of more arctic types as you endure. Kim

Ok--I see what you were primarily referring to--those blamed winter cones--which most serious gardeners I know would never use (for a number of reasons, including canker problems). That was a marketing idea that made someone money--but didn't work very well for the actual gardener.

I guess one reason I got riled up is that here in Zone 6, I do nothing in particular to winter protect except once in a while kick some oak leaves from my neighbors' trees around one of my newer roses. Yet every year, my next door neighbor and others in this town (who all grow 3 roses apiece) ask for my approval for doing a late autumn pruning to "prepare" their roses for winter. And every year, I tell them that isn't needed unless they have a jolly green giant cane that would go whipping in the winter wind--in which case, tie or chop it back--but that is it for "winter-pruning." Every year they give me a look of doubt, like they think I'm deliberately leading them astray on the topic, and every year they admire my roses which don't get pruned until early spring--and every fall they ask me again if they can prune their roses back to "prepare" for winter.

I'm really tired of that yearly ritual. I wonder how many years they think they will have to ask me before I agree with them that they should "winter-prune" their roses in late autumn.

I apologize to the forum for temporarily "losing it." It was a hot-button issue for me, wasn't it!

Kate

Yes ma'am, I apologize for leaning on your "hot button"! Your "winter pruning" is about the same as mine. "Winter" here consists of wind, increasing heat and the primary chances of any rain, so overly long whips must either be secured or amputated or they're going to do damage. Either to the roses, or people. I prune others' roses much more than my own primarily because those gardens are planted for specific effects, in specific spaces which are generally much more formal and restricted than what I permit mine to be. Even those, though, are permitted to do their own things longer than convention would usually permit.

Your advice there seems about as heretical to your neighbors as mine is here to mine. That's what I meant about "gardening legend" which becomes accepted theology from continuous repetition. But, if you set everything in motion correctly, little, if any, of that is honestly necessary and life goes on much more smoothly and easily. Thanks. Kim

I agree that heavy pruning is not indicated for most roses, but have found that even with tea roses, where sometimes the idea is given that they should barely be touched at all, a judicious amount of cutting back has seemed to greatly benefit my roses, resulting in denser bushes, more new growth and increased bloom production. Smaller but still gangly Austins produce many more flowers after conservative pruning (or perhaps I should say cutting back) than do unpruned ones, which I found by experimenting on these roses in my garden. Bermuda Kathleen, situated in an extremely hot situation and looking miserable and gangly, made a complete turnaround after an overall haircut, even before cooler weather set in. The same was true of Mrs. Dudley Cross, Souv. de Germain de St. Pierre, La Vesuve and Miss Atwood. Souv. de Germain looked plain ugly and I was contemplating taking it out because of its rather unsatisfactory flowers and extremely gangly and wayward growth, so I had no compunction about cutting it back several feet on all sides to give it some shape, and the results were remarkable. It exploded into new leaves and buds and looked much more appropriate in its particular setting than every before. That prompted me to give it a lot more mulch and water it more thoroughly, so one might say it was a combination of factors. Nevertheless, I'm now convinced that established, inherently vigorous and healthy roses really need to have haircuts for them to stay that way.

I couldn't agree more with the idea that fewer but healthier and therefore more beautiful roses should be the goal in our increasingly water-deprived environment. I would also argue the same goes for areas where many roses don't do well due to great disease pressure. Grow those you love to look at and are healthy, even in multiples, rather than many roses that offend your eyes and depress you for a large part of the year.

In regard to the photo of a rose company of a completely unrealistic Burgundy Iceberg, I wonder whether they had even stopped to think of the actual shade of "burgundy". I wonder if anyone would actually drink burgundy wine if it were the color of the rose in that photograph!

Ingrid

While there are certainly many roses (out of the tens of thousands out there) which will be miserable in particular locations without chemical fungicides, there are many others which will do just fine. The key is to try things out and see what works where you are.

Of course we are initially drawn to the "rose porn" photos of plants at their absolute best, but is it realistic to expect them to look that way all season? Upon how many of our other garden plants do we place that expectation? Many plants go through dowdy phases throughout the season, but that is why we have gardens with variety -- plants which come into their peaks at different times to offer interest throughout the seasons.

There was an azalea in front of my house (which I moved to make room for a rose I'd rather have in its place) which was gorgeous up until a few weeks after it bloomed. In passing, you might not notice it much, but if you got up close, you'd see tired-looking foliage that slowly deteriorated further as the heat of Summer wore on. Its time in the spotlight had passed, but I wasn't about to fret about keeping it looking "perfect" anyway. I have a similar attitude toward the roses -- if they start looking ratty during a hot Summer spell, that tells me I need to plant something which comes into its own at that time. About the only things which maintain their stalwart appearance throughout the year are conifers, but I'm not about to fill my yard with only them.

In the garden I'm building, roses are the "bones" around which I will plant other things. As long as fungal diseases don't cause the plant to decline toward death, I don't care about a few spotty leaves, or even a naked period when they're shed. Similarly, I'm planning to include Spring-flowering bulbs, despite the way they will look as they start going dormant after their peak. It doesn't matter as much to me because where they'll be planted, other things will start their peaks at that time. Many other garden stalwarts will also have their ratty-times -- how are your peonies looking by July?

If you plant things in a "landscaping way", such that there is clearly delineated space between things, you'll have dramatic shows as things come into their own, but will have to contend with the spotlight still shining on them during their down-times. But if you have more of a "cottage-y" approach, with things spilling around each other, then there is less focus on every individual part and more of the garden as a whole-- and plants going into their down-times will do so in a fading, receding motion while others step forward as they come into their own. And for continued interest during the growing season, plant bedding annuals here and there. You'll be amazed how less you focus on spotty foliage on roses when there's so much else blooming and looking wonderful at that point in the season.

:-)

~Christopher

As Christopher pointed out, nothing looks "on stage" at all times. We too often forget that in the "Landed Gentry" ages, the "rose garden" was just that, the garden for roses. No one paid much attention to that until they flowered, when excursions to that area of the garden were made. Once they had passed, it was ignored until next year around the same time. The perennial borders probably came into their own next, and that's where people went for garden enjoyment. That's why the introduction of truly "repeat flowering" then "ever blooming roses" created such a sensation. To think, it was suddenly possible to have rose flowers nearly year round, (or, at least as long as the warmer weather remained), though were nothing like the rose flowers everyone knew and loved. We, with smaller gardens and the lack of "staff" to maintain them, and particularly those in "endless summer" climates, have an even greater issue with those which don't carry their weight for the full length of the season. Kim

Campanula, that is going to be quite a change for you. I’m sure the 20 you are taking are your favorites and all that time you spent working with 120 roses gave you the chance to discover which roses you enjoyed the most. I am not familiar with those you listed, but hybrid musks and ramblers sound great. Trying a big old rambler sounds like a fun new project.

Kate, I’m thinking about how my Golden Celebration did and actually maybe it didn’t do as badly as I thought it did. I think I have a low tolerance for ugly foliage. I’m going to have to adjust that. And perhaps if I had managed the rose better, it might have been acceptable in my garden. I do love the Austin roses and will have to try another one. And I agree that starting with a list of disease resistant roses that have done well for somebody is better than just ‘pinning the tail on the donkey’ with no list.

I’ve got an order ready. I’ve been working on it all week. Spent time on old posts here and on HMF. I did find someone in CT on HMF who is trying to grow ‘no spray’ and she is growing Aloha successfully for many years and has friends who do as well. I’ve heard good things about Aloha before so I’m going to try her. I like the color and said to be very fragrant, so worth a shot. I’ve resisted The Fairy for awhile because of the lack of fragrance, but she sounds pretty bulletproof and blooms a long time and Marie Pavie, I am hoping might work out too, since she is more fragrant and has repeat bloom too. And I do have a small front garden. I have to try another Austin, so I’m going with Munstead Wood and keeping my fingers crossed. And I loved Paul’s photo of Charles de Mills, so I’m going to give that one a try. Thank you Paul. :-)

So that’s it for now. I want to get an order in before they are sold out and after January I will have more time to leisurely consider others for a possible second order.

I think you all have given me a crash course here in this thread…lol. I have lots and lots more to learn, but this has been a good beginning. Thanks to everyone… :-)

prairiemoon, I'm glad you are going to try out a few more Austins. I'm crazy about Munstead Wood, but I've only had it one season, so I can't say for sure how bs-resistant it will prove to be, but I can firmly assure you that it is doing terrifically well its first season.

If I had any space left at all, I'd love to try Old Wollerton Hall for a somewhat taller, disease-resistant Austin in the light, delicate pastel shades and Princess Alexandra of Kent which is about the same size as Munstead Wood (3 ft) but a lovely medium pink on big full blooms--very disease-resistant supposedly. If you try them, let me know how they do for you. They sound first-rate to me.

Queen of Sweden is a fine Austin--pastel pink with light apricot highlights, disease-resistant, 4 ft tall--and just lovely. I have three of them forming a kind of informal hedgerow.

Just a few to tempt you. : )

Kate

Kate, I am tempering my excitement with the Munstead Wood, only because it's a good possibility that it will get BS here, but it might be an acceptable level, I won't know unless I try it. So we'll see. And hopefully at least a couple of roses in my order will fit my garden. I feel like it was a conservative order and some of them are really landscape roses. But I haven't had a new rose in two or three years, so this will be fun.

Those three Austins photos are very pretty. I take it you don't have room for another. (g) So all your roses must be doing pretty well for you to keep them when you want space for another one.

I'm glad to have the winter to take my time and come up with another list. Thanks!

dublinbay ,

Around here 80% of people cut there roses down to within 6-8 inches from the ground in October for the winter...

You would be knocking on lots of doors in this town and screaming at them....lol

This post was edited by jim1961 on Fri, Nov 8, 13 at 18:54

I think that's the key, prariemoon. You won't know which ones will work until you try them. And no matter what rose you ask about you will find people who adore it and people who hate it. Location, location, location! And I'm not just talking about the difference between California and Massachusetts.

A few years ago I got a plant of Memphis Blues. It was OK. Not the best of growers but hanging in there. Somehow I accidentally broke off a large cane while working in the bed. Heartbroken I decided to try and root it. It rooted well and the next year I gave the new plant to my cousin who lives ONE block away from me. She now has a gorgeous 3 foot tall plant and mine has literally disappeared. The one cane I had left this spring when I pruned it died over the summer for no apparent reason I can find. Although my plant was never very vigorous it seems to LOVE her garden and keeps getting bigger each year.

Every yard has it's own major climate and micro climates within it. Sometimes just moving a plant can make all the difference in the world. So don't be afraid to try the roses you like. Yes, some of them will crash and burn. Chalk those up to a learning experience. Some of them will give you years of enjoyment too!

When you stop and think about it roses aren't much different from the rest of your garden I'll bet. We all try new plants. Some of them do well and some we have to remove or remember not to get next season because they didn't work out. Gardens change and evolve all the time. And roses are a part of that ever changing picture.

OK--Jim. You have my apologies. I certainly have never done that in my northern gardens, and I don't really approve of your people cutting them down every fall to 6-8 inches--for the reasons that Kim and others above have given--very hard on the roses, in the long run! But if you folks want to do that, then do it. Like I said, different strokes for different folks--and I'm not going to tell you folks what to do.

But I still think that is the nuttiest thing I have heard in a long time. But what the heck--if you're happy, then I'm happy. Ok? LOL

Kate

Kate ....

Kim probably got the information about "snow-tipping" roses from me, so I am responsible for hitting your hot button.

Out of about 100 roses, I snow-tip or lace four roses every year. At my elevation, when I get snow, it's the heavy, wet, gloppy stuff that can cause breakage ... never where I want it ... on a few roses. These four roses develop a heavy, dense canopy during the growing season and seem to have canes that don't bend with the weight of the snow, but break.

I guess you could call it winter protection for the rose, but actually it is winter protection for me. By opening up the canopy before it snows, the snow falls through the plant and there is no breakage. It is definitely not a hard prune.

Shoveling snow is hard enough work without having to wade through the snow out to the few roses that are susceptible to breakage to shake the snow off of them to protect them from breakage.

Smiles,
Lyn

Seil, I was just looking over your previous post and don’t know how I missed, that you’ve inherited your Grandmother and Mother’s roses. Wow, that is such an amazing gift! And for her to have kept all those roses growing long enough for you to inherit them…quite an accomplishment.

I did see if I could find you on HMF and there you were, right under Michigan. I see you have some very pretty roses. I also love some of the names. ‘Falling in Love’ such a pretty name and the rose is gorgeous! Very romantic roses and rose names.
I'm sure your Mom would love that you are learning all about her roses and taking such good care of them.

Great story about Memphis Blues. That is kind of hard to believe but there it is, it happens. But a story like that, really does make you stop and give something one last try before giving up on it. Move it over the other side of the yard maybe.

Thanks… :-)

OK, OK--my apologies to you also. With climate change going on, I may never see snow again here in southern Kansas--at least, have had almost none the past couple years, whereas back in the 1980s, half the town used to shut down because of the heavy snowstorms. Us ex-northerners thought that was hilarious and would drive around helping all the southern Kansans stuck in snowbanks. Strange how we never got hung up in snowbanks, but those southern Kansans--I swear they would head straight for the banked up snow and plow into it, and then wonder why they were stuck.

It never did occur to me in those days that I should trim back my roses because of the snow, and I don't remember ever losing any rose as a result, but hey, if it saved your roses, more power to you! So go to it with my blessing (as though you needed that)--LOL

Kate

Kate ...

I agree that the roses in my garden should only be pruned in spring. They need the nutrients stored in their canes to get through winter and push new growth in the following season.

I didn't think about doing any fall pruning either until I had to deal with the breakage. When one of my gardening friends told me that she protects her roses by going out and shaking the snow off of the roses, my first thought was, "There has to be a better way !" Four roses out of a hundred ... I can handle that.

PM2 ...

You asked me two specific questions which I think Kim has address above, but I'll add my two cents.

"By ‘modern roses’ does that mean anything other than old garden roses? And couldn’t the same thing be said about old garden roses, that they store their nutrients in their canes?

As Kim mentioned, the process of going dormant is for the plant to move its nutrients into the root zone during the winter so that it is available to the plant for the following season. The evergreen roses he mentions brought the ability for repeat bloom into the rose gene pool, but it also brought the genes that keep the roses from going truly dormant, so they store their nutrients in the canes/top growth, which makes them more vulnerable to the impact of cold weather. Some modern roses are hardier than others. It depends on their lineage ... how much evergreen rose genes are in their breeding.

Since I don't have die back in my garden, I can only answer your question in theory. Those that have grown roses in colder zones than mine can answer from experience.

I think if a rose dies back completely in your garden, it is probably too tender for your climate and will not be as successful as a rose that doesn't die back to the ground every year. You can baby it, a lot of people do, but do you want to ?

Are you also saying that once my roses were pruned back hard, that they will always be weak? Even if I changed my pruning habits?

The honest answer is that I don't know because I have never dealt with that issue. As usual, "it depends on the rose".

In my garden, heat is the bigger issue impacting the performance of a rose. My garden is in Heat Zone 8. There are roses that simply thrive in somewhat cooler climates and are just awful in my garden.

There are several public gardens listed on HMF for Massachusetts. I don't think their plant lists are up-to-date, but here's how you find both private and public gardens on HMF.

1. Click on GARDENS on the navigation bar to the left.
2. Click on the LIST BY LOCATION tab
3. Select the COUNTRY (US)
4. Select the STATE (Massachusetts)

Looking at the plants listed and possibly visiting the public gardens might be a great help to you in selecting roses that will grow well in your garden.

Smiles,
Lyn

Just another note on pruning with regards to once bloomers. Many of these bloom on old wood (as in at least one year old). If you cut off the old wood you may not get as much as a single flower that year. The growth in the current year doesn't flower, but leave it alone so that next year you will get flowers. This point was brought home to me somewhat painfully again this year. My favorite rose is my alba Felicite Parmentier. She has put on a spectacular display every year for the 20+ years I've had her except for 2. This year was unfortunately one of them. My gardener hired a new assistant this year. I came outside one day just after they had left. The new assistant had hacked the daylights out of Felicite, and had pruned her down to hybrid tea heights. Catastrophe! Needless to say no flowers this year for me (but I had words with my gardener the following week)! The last time she didn't bloom he'd also hired a new assistant who also assumed all roses ought to be hacked nearly to the ground as some routinely recommend for hybrid teas. Btw this year the guy also butchered Baty's Pink Pillar (plenty left still up in a tree where it bloomed in spite of the hatchet job) and York and Lancaster, my gigantic once-blooming damask (also bloomed because there was simply too much for Mr. Chopper to cut off.;)

Prairiemoon, you mentioned the flowers on Madame Plantier were smaller than you like, but you also mentioned her poor performance. I don't know how much or if you pruned her, but she is another of the once bloomers that likely won't flower at all on new wood (current year's growth). Just fyi.

Btw I also grow roses no spray and no fungicide either. In Southern California the disease pressure is mainly from rust and mildew. Roses addicted to one or both aren't welcome here because I refuse to use chemicals to treat these maladies. The same for blackspot. However, not many roses blackspot here. The few that have I gave away this year after short stays (both teas--Tipsy Imperial Concubine, she completely defoliated 2 springs in a row and Niles Cochet which had the unique distinction of blackspotting, rusting, and mildewing simultaneously, which I might add was really and truly UGLY--but I suspect this rose was incorrectly identified and was in actuality really Barcelona/Francis Dubrueil). Interestingly enough the rose said to be a virtual blackspot vacation spot, R. foetida 'Persiana' has never had a trace of anything marring its leaves. Must be that whatever race or races of blackspot it is vulnerable to are not found in my garden.

Since you garden spray-free Prairiemoon, I'd recommend the book "The Sustainable Rose Garden" to you, ISBN 978-1-935149-16-3, published in 2010. It includes chapters written by noted rosarians and is chock full of advice handy for organic growers. Two chapters were authored by our very own Jeri Jennings.;)

Kim, there was a presentation on the blackspot races in the US and elsewhere at Great Rosarians (2011???). The presenter, I believe, was Peter Kukielski (sp?) from the Peggy Rockefeller Rose Garden. Peter authored a chapter in the above book called "The Peggy Rockefeller Rose Garden's Dual Mission of Disease Resistance and Protecting 'Eva' ". I think I took pictures of a number of his slides/powerpoint images, but I don't know where I put them......

Melissa

Thanks, Melissa, yes I was there for Peter's presentation. That's where I was initially introduced to the five races of black spot concept. There have been quite a few further developments I've become aware of through the RHA. Kim

Melissa, thank you for the info on your roses and the reminder about pruning once bloomers. Bet that saves some ones spring/summer.

How many years were yours planted on average before they started blooming? I would be pleased if I got a couple blooms off mine this year.

Kim, I just found my photos. Not great to say the least!;) Include peoples' heads in the audience so images are somewhat obscured (fortunately I took notes too, but where those are is another question....). At least one includes a scientific paper in the background. I can read that and do a search to pull up a link so folks here can read the abstract if not the whole article (sometimes there is a fee for online access to complete text). Below is a link to the article in the image posted. While looking at that a newer article (from 2012) popped up, http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/22905676

Kippy, as best I recall, for once-bloomers, I got many as bands, and they bloomed the following year. I didn't know back then I couldn't grow them here so I ordered classes not always recommended these days for my zone. York and Lancaster is one of these and is a super wafter. I wouldn't like to be without it because of all the pleasure it gives me. It HAD (past tense!) never been pruned until this year since I bought it back in the 1990s. It is now up on my roof! The canes gently sway in the breeze as they drape over its tall neighbors that gave this rose the opportunity to climb (it is really too floppy to climb without support). It grows in a lot of shade, is seldom watered, and almost never fed. I love the graceful flowers and the cloak of perfume they produce. No disease on the plant ever. Has wicked thorns though so not for the faint of heart. Flowers can be all pink (most often), pink and white, or almost all white--all on the same plant at the same time.

Melissa

Here is a link that might be useful: Rdr3, a novel locus conferring black spot disease resistance...

I haven't posted about the Peggy Rockefeller Rose Garden list for over a year. It usually gets a cool reception.

Here is a link that might be useful: Kordes roses verdict: excellent

It is interesting and pleasant to see the Peggy Rockefeller Rose Garden mentioned repeatedly in this thread.

Although the last performance rating of the roses online seems to be from 2010, there are other indications or at least conclusions that may be drawn about the roses in the garden.

As in the thread linked below where an innocent might conclude that one would be wrong to say anything bad about a rose or roses, or conversely to advocate the virtues of any rose over any others, it may be that the Garden feels that it would not be politic of them to publish the results of their findings - I don't know.

So, I'm even a bit hesitant to share with you my method for drawing conclusions - not for my sake, but out of respect for the NYBG's decision not to post the ratings.

If there were to be any sort of pressure like that, then even the information from which I'm drawing the conclusions could be removed.

I personally abhor censorship or pressuring anyone to refrain from freely sharing information because I believe in freedom of information (without copyright infringement maybe I ought to add).

OK, that's been stated.

So, although there isn't a recent rating list, there are inventory lists for roses included in the garden as of spring 2012 and 2013. If one copies and pastes them in parallel into something like Excel, one can scroll down and see additions and subtractions.

However, I cannot speak to the validity of any conclusions one might draw; they would probably be better termed assumptions than conclusions.

Here is a link that might be useful: A brighter outlook, please?

Thank you, prariemoon. I have 7 inherited roses. I wish I had more of them but due to my own learning curve I lost a few. I have been replacing some of the ones they had though. I enjoy having them because they bring back memories.

Falling in Love is not one of the old ones though. It's a fairly new release. While the bloom is really gorgeous I have to warn you that it is THE THORNIEST rose you'll ever see!

I hope that you understand my point that even if everyone tells you a rose won't work for you, but you really love it and want it, try it anyway. You can't know until you do. I should not be trying to grow Teas and Chinas in my zone 6 but I am because I love the look of them. It may work and it may not but I won't know if I don't try.

I don't do any fall pruning either. I've had a running battle with my society president who firmly believes in rose cones and whacks all his roses down every fall to get them on. It seems to work for him but I know that I have lost roses when I pruned them in the fall.

I lost my Dublin Bay that way. It was a healthy climber but it hadn't gotten any new basals in years I wanted to try and encourage it to give me some new canes so I cut it back one fall. Dumb! What was I thinking? I knew I shouldn't have pruned in the fall. It died that winter and I now have a lovely (not) Dr. Huey in it's place. Oh joy.

You're going to have to prune them in the spring regardless of whether you prune them in the fall or not. So why prune them twice? And why take off perfectly healthy cane that could survive the winter? Over winter you'll lose some cane to die back. It's almost inescapable. So you take a large healthy plant, whack it off in October or November, then have to whack it back even further in April or May. You end up with nothing left but stubs. It just never makes sense to me. We all want big healthy bushes so why do we keep chopping them down?

But I know I'm a rogue. I don't prune mine down much even in the spring. I only take off what is obviously winter damaged cane and leave them as big as I can. In my experience I get larger healthier plants that bloom sooner for me with this method. I know I'm supposed to cut them all to a nice uniform 12 to 18 inches like the manuals say but I just can't find a reason to take off all that living green cane.

Rose cones?!
A few years ago, in the UK, it was an absolute top fad to get into growing 'tropicals' (thanks for nothin, Christopher Lloyd) and all over the country, a rash of bananas were appearing everywhere (along with an extremely limited selection of other leafy things such as eucomis, tetrapanax, flowering gingers). All well and good (for some) apart from the fact that their gardens consisted, for up to 6 months of the year, of huge, white, fleece wrapped abominations, standing like dreary sentinels amongst the decaying foliage and tatty dahlia heads. A ghastly, grim look, massively more popular with men, and involving an exhausting mission of moving heavy pots in and out of garages, greenhouses and sheds.

Well, no thanks. If I ever had great ambitions to push the zone envelope (I don't because I am lazy), the winter sight of these horrid 'statues' would have changed my mind very rapidly.

Just a word on pruning since it seems to cause no end of anxiety. It is not a necessity - if we didn't do it, then nature would do it for us. Handily, animals and weather, age and disease will more or less keep our plants in a generally OK order. Secateurs are optional....and weirdly counter-intuitive. Following the principle that 'growth follows the knife', it has still been a harsh lesson in balancing, having to cut a lopsided tree even further back on the thin side....or to rejuvenate aging shrubs by stooling back to the ground....or, coppicing and pollarding in order to extend the life cycle of a tree by hundreds of years. There's a lot we don't really know but fortunately, life is remarkably tenacious and, if a plant dies, it is usually after a gallant attempt at survival and probably not one to choose again.

Tessiess, yes, thanks for pointing out that old roses bloom on old wood. It would have taken me awhile before I stumbled upon that information.

And on the Madame Plantier, I can’t remember whether I pruned it or not, but it’s so interesting to think that was an important piece of information that I didn’t have when I had that rose. Assuming I knew what I needed to know I guess.

Glad to hear you are going ‘no spray’ in California. I guess there isn’t a perfect place to grow roses. It’s six of one and half a dozen of the other. But it sounds like you have lots of success and pleasure from your roses. Too bad about the inadvertent pruning!

Looks like a good book recommendation. I’m going to look for it at the library today. Thanks. :-)

Lyn, Since I had thought you were ‘supposed’ to prune roses back every spring, I haven’t been really noticing how much die back I’ve had. I only remember noticing that I did have growth high up on Julia Child last year. Something I will be looking for now on everything.

I'm thinking about what you said about roses that die back to the ground may be too tender for my garden and it makes me think of a couple of garden plants that die back to the ground here in New England, that are great garden plants that just get cut back to the ground every year. Perovskia for example, often has little new growth above a foot off the ground. Butterfly Bushes that I’ve cut down to a foot every spring for years and they've done well here. Hardy Hibiscus that needs all the old stems cut off every year and new growth comes up from the ground. With Butterfly Bushes, sometimes I have less dieback and now I am thinking maybe they will do better for me, if I cut off as little as possible. I'm going to have to try that this year.

Thanks for the info on how to find gardens in my area. I hope I am going to get to a few next season.

No need to apolgize dublinbay ....lol

The thing that gets me with people around here is that they never cut out dead wood on there roses...
So in October when they cut there roses down to 6-8 inches you can see lots of dead wood from years back.
Makes me want to carry lopers with me on my walks and cut that dead crap out...lol

Sandandsun, You piqued my curiosity and I spent some time looking at those lists on the Peggy Rockefeller site. And while you are correct that conclusions drawn are no more than assumptions, I still think those conclusions are of value. There are only 8 roses that were on the original top 100 list, that are no longer listed for the garden. I think that’s pretty good. So the roses growing in 2013 were at least in their 3rd year. It will be interesting to see what is on their list next year.

I also saw that all the roses I am ordering are in their garden, although only two are on their Top 100 list. But all of them are still in the garden, so that is encouraging.

As a casual rose grower, my limited view, is that the NYBotanical Garden, where the Peggy Rockefeller Roses are, must attract some of the top horticultural talent in the country and must have a pretty significant budget, and connections through the rose industry. I could be wrong and maybe some of you know the inside scoop, but I can’t help but think that it is a wonderful opportunity for all rose growers but especially rose growers in their location, to have such an organization decide that it was important enough to stop using chemicals in the rose garden and then to actually embark on such a huge undertaking as to remove all the roses they were growing with chemicals and change to no chemicals and install close to 1,000 varieties, all hardy, to trial there under those growing conditions. They’re also hosting the EarthKind trials.

Having said that, I also have questions about how they are able to grow some roses that have been thought to have issues with blackspot. Could it be that they are using products that are considered ‘safe’? Or are they tolerating some ugly foliage? Naturally, I’m sure they are trying to look at the roses that are most used and popular breeders. For instance, they are growing a LOT of David Austin roses. Eighty by my count. And only two of them seem to be missing from their 2013 list. Kordes is well represented too along with many others.

I wonder if someone involved in the program is planning to write a book about it? That might answer a lot of questions.

Campanula, I've never been a fan of tropicals in my northeastern location for some of the same reasons you mention. But at least we haven't had them outside all trussed up to look at all winter. Also wouldn't have a rose that I had to use rose cones for, but that's just me. I don't object to someone else doing it.

I probably get 80% of my rose joy from 20% of my roses.

Though...I probably get 90% of my rose education from the problematic roses, not the superstars.

Hoovb,

Though...I probably get 90% of my rose education from the problematic roses, not the superstars.

Funny you should mention that. My grandfather always said in a heavy slovac accent "You learn best from your mistakes and the most from ones that cost you the most"

SCG

Seil, I would be thrilled if any of my kids pursued gardening in my absence. So your interest in what you are doing alone, I’m sure would make your Mom happy. :-)

Yes, I understand that if you love a rose, don’t be afraid to try it. At the same time, I’m going to try to balance trying roses I love with trying to find roses that love me. Some of both would be nice. (g)

I haven’t done any fall pruning either, just because across the board, shrubs are normally pruned when they are dormant or in spring or right after they bloom, so I guess I just used that same yardstick for roses.

SCG, your grandfather had some wisdom there!

Melissa -- If the blighted rose rusted, mildewed and blackspotted, it fer sure wasn't Niles Cochet.

FWIW, The worst rusters I've ever had here were 'Eugene de Beauharnais' [Le Grande Capitaine], Tamora, and Ambridge Rose. Poor Eugene is the ONLY rose I've grown that rusted on new foliage, with the fungus showing up as the new leaf opened.

'Barcelona' ["Francis Dubreuil"] only mildewed for us. But he mildewed badly.

For the real Niles, see below.

Jeri

My big zone push experiment is with Gooseberries and a Red Lake Currant. I discovered that the first two I planted are getting next to no sun, as soon as they go dormant, they are getting moved a couple of feet to where they can get some sun. The first gooseberry so far has grown but not set fruit but the currant had a few handfuls of tasty red berries this year. I have no expectations of huge crops, that handful made me happy. If I lived somewhere they grew I would probably be disappointed. Being in a zone they do not grow, I am happy.

I think some times we have expectations that limit how much we will like a plant. If we are happy with a few blooms from a special rose, maybe it does not make a difference if we have to cover the ugly with companion plants. We might not want a garden filled with the ones that struggle. But if it is Mom's special rose, why not try it.

As far as the garden and all the Austins, guessing those plants were all donated, Austin may hope that they do well and they can use that to sell more plants. Or if the first spring flush looks good, that is when they will sell tons of plants. If they later look rotten, chances are your average consumer is not going to take notes and they have already made the sales.

I am going to order two plants I have been told will probably not like our garden. I figure it is a $25 lesson on garden zones and expectations. If they grow 1/3 of the typical size, I will be thrilled. I know that our lot has a variety of micro climates, so hoping they like the one I pick. Before I knew what rose it was, I moved a self rooted plant from a spot where it got a lot of radiated heat from a garage to what I thought should be a much better place. The other Iceberg roses loved it there, but this one plant turned in to a rusty mildew nasty looking thing....Guess that is the usual look for Simplicity, but the others are okay in that one special spot (not wonderful-but okay) Makes me wonder how many roses are considered great or bad depending on some minor micro-climate changes.

PM2.......

The plants you cut back in the fall, other than your roses, in a sense, know how to go dormant. They are pulling the nutrients they need down to their root zone. All of the various plant families have their own way of adapting to your climate. Some plants will work well for you and others won't. Suzy's example about trying to grow tropical plants in England is a perfect example.

The repeat blooming roses have the genes of more tropical roses in their lineage than many of the once blooming roses which is what makes them more "tender". Not all of them, but many of them.

Early in my rose life, Kim taught me that the best teacher for learning how to handle a rose is the rose. When I would ask a question, he generally responded by telling me to learn from the rose.

My pruning techniques will be very different than yours because my climate is very different. The primary goal of pruning is to create a healthy plant for your climate. Since I really don't have to worry about cold hardiness, but do have to worry about heat tolerance, how I prune my roses will be of little value to you. It's best to learn both from the rose and from people who garden in a climate similar to yours.

Smiles,
Lyn

The reverse of that is, when I grow "deciduous" perennials here and DON'T prune them back as Nature does where they are indigenous, they become woody and short lived. Buddleja can be permitted to grow into tree-like proportions here, but that also shortens their productive lives, exposing them to faster and more severe attack by termites. If I prune them back severely each spring, as hard freezes might where they are indigenous, they remain more "juvenile", lush, heavier flowering for much longer times with much less chance of being attractive to termites, which are a real concern in my climate. Other less woody perennials also require those harder prunes or they, too, become woodier, old, dead in their centers. You have to take your cues from the plants, keeping in mind what Nature does to them where they originate. Kim

Thanks Lyn, good advice, I’m sure next season I’m going to make an attempt to get some local help on the pruning front. :-)

Kim, Termites are that bad there? Have never heard of termites effecting garden plants here. Houses, yes, plants not so much. I think it would be unusual at least. I’ve heard that Hawaii has a huge problem with termites but I didn’t know gardeners in California have to deal with that. Sounds like you’ve found a way around it for the Butterfly Bush at least. Thanks for that explanation.

I love pruning actually. I’m limited in my understanding of what one plant or another need or don’t need it, but I think it really can make a big difference. I have perennial cranesbill and normally after they bloom, I just leave them alone and by fall they look pretty awful. This year after they bloomed, I decided to prune them back well and I was amazed at how fresh and healthy they looked the rest of the season. And I grow a couple of Ninebarks that are very tolerant of hard pruning and instructions often suggest you can prune to the ground every spring.

But that is a subject for another thread. Thanks and I think I have run out of questions on this thread. :-) Thanks again.

Kippy, I feel that way about some roses. Rose fragrance is something I would keep a plant for and surround with companions in it’s down time, even with just a few blooms.

I did a little more reading about the PRRGarden and the curator, said he rates each rose in the garden once a month and they have to be above a 6 to stay. he also has volunteers make their own evaluations twice a year to try to keep it objective.

You could be right about the way in which Austin benefits from having his plants in the garden there. And how the average consumer responds. I also think though that the fact they are trying to go ‘no chemical’ might attract more gardeners who are paying attention more to the overall health of plants.

I was also somewhat disappointed to learn that they still use some products on their roses. The article said they’ve reduced use by 86% and his staff ..’sprays sparingly for pests like spider mites and rose midges, but the formulations are lighter than in the past. Fertilizers are organic, with fish emulsion a favorite.’ I linked to one of the articles below for anyone who has an interest.

So that might be another reason why they are managing to grow Austins. I’d still like to visit their garden next year.

I think experimenting is fun and $25. is cheap enough for a learning experience and some entertainment as well. :-) Maybe you are onto something with the micro-climates. I’m always surprised at how differently a plant can grow when I move it around the garden.

Here is a link that might be useful: Seeking a More Vigorous and Self-Sufficient Rose in the Bronx