i agre with karl no spry means just that, none, nada, zip. which i also practice. do i get diseases and pests? of course. when the roses wake up in april and start putting on good growth i get powdery mildew really bad, by the end of may it is pretty much gone. all the while the aphids are around, i found that if you go around the garden with a long stick once a day and bang the tops of the stems it does a pretty good job of controlling them. june through august are mostly disease free except for those japanese beetles(which are not bad any more.)the end of august black spot shows up sometimes pretty bad, but the roses replace foliage quickly. september brings the mildew back but by then the season is all but over. i have learned to live with and accept the good with the bad and enjoy it all, my life is far to busy. when it becomes work its no longer fun anymore. and i can honestly say i havent lost a single rose to disease except for a non curable such as rrd. the birds and the bees are probably happier too

Ugh, still have not answered the question. Forget it......

No spray... no pump... no soil drench, whether it is organic or chemical based. that is my practice, i don't even own a pump.

Seems to me, those that say "No Spray" also do not use a drench. Probably because they do not want roses that will require that level of chemical intervention, no matter the delivery method.

Never read a report that said a rosarian died due to breathing the stuff sprayed on the roses. Never once. It has ALWAYS been about what is going into the soil. Using a "drench" is just POURING it in. Hmm, I think that's clear, but I won't be surprised if it isn't.

well this is a bed of prickles for the unwary, no? I should state at once that I am not organic (nor do I know any other organic gardeners - although I do know heaps of people who claim to be no-spray, no chemicals, no this and that). Even the soil association, so-called arbiters of anything which seeks to have an accreditted organic label applied, has certain exceptions to the organic or not rulings. For example, I can apply copper sprays to my tomatoes and potatoes and still call myself organic. In fact, it is a truly useless label which has no consensual definition but leads to immense amounts of huffing and self-righteous puffing. I certainly do not imagine that most no-spray gardeners would consider the delivery mode to have much bearing upon their philosophical stance but, as will be apparent if this thread continues, such vague definitions serve no useful purpose apart from a chance to get condescending or patronising to subscribers of opposing horticultural methods.
However, I would also not subscribe to the personal choice option so beloved of defensive gardeners since we do not garden in isolation and water, for example, certainly flows from property to property. Still, this is just politics in many ways and we all know how those debates turn out.
Expect no clear answer, Susan, but an awful lot of justification, bluster and well-meaning explications (starting with my own, on the fence waffling).

For me, no drench, either. I'm very Darwinian--the roses survive or they don't with minimal help from me. Besides my cats, I have a lot of wildlife and I'm on a well, so chemicals, short or potentially long-term toxic are not something I want to put into our environment. I'm aware my individual use/not-use doesn't add up to much, that the balance of nature is already wildly screwed, that I contribute to the screwup in other parts of my life. But its the little bit I can do to keep the world healthy. It's the old "suppose they gave a war and nobody came" philosophy.

I grow roses not only for their beauty, but also for their history, because their names and their travels mark human values, who and what was important to us. Louise Odier, Mon Tillier, Edith Clavel live on in a rose. Someday no one will remember who Dolly Parton was, but so much aboput her lives on in her rose. When the mailman noticed the date on the Apothecary's rose (So for me, the roses do not have to be perfect; nothing in nature is perfect and they are not here to reflect my ego or my skills. They merely have to live in community here, which includes bugs and fungus and critters.

Sulfur and Messenger are "organic" but not "no spray." I guess a user of the Bayer soil drench could call herself a "no spray gardener," but that would be silly and contrary to the spirit of the thing. I wouldn't use the word "toxic" as a category. Even vinegar, baking soda, table salt, etc., are toxic in excess. What distinguishes "organic" pesticides like sulfur is that they are natural rather than synthetic chemicals. The chemicals in the Bayer drench are synthetic. It happens that sulfur is nearly non-toxic, but copper, also "organic," does pose health risks if used carelessly. New chemicals from organic sources such as spinosad, Compass, and Heritage are considered "organic" by some, not by others, and they seem to be relatively safe to use.

Susan - sorry you are frustrated by the lack of specific, clear responses to your question. I think that is because there is no agreed upon definition of "no spray", and so people who use that term mean what they do personally, which can vary from person to person. Unlike "organic", even the governments don't seem to have a definition (although you might check Canada - I heard they passed a new law outlawing "spraying" toxics, although I don't know what definition they use).

Campanula described the situation perfectly, as usual.

My personal philosophy is close to catrose's - except that occasionally I do break all of my rules and go to war with chemical weapons if one particular beloved rose or another is under overwhelming attack by something - I especially hate the curculios that we get in the Spring which poke holes in rose buds so that they don't open....nothing in my garden is absolute, which probably is the case for many.

Jackie

For me no spray means no use of artificially engineered chemical toxins in any form or manner. But that doesn't mean organic either. Organic is a whole other kettle of fish, pun intended, lol. And even so called "organic" things are still chemicals when you think about it. They're just ones that occur more naturally usually.

I'd call myself a low spray gardener in that I do use chemical intervention when things get out of hand. But basically I'm lazy and I hate having to handle the stuff so I rarely do. I may spray twice in a season. Usually in the spring before my shows and then later in the fall when the black spot pressure really rises here. I do use chemical fertilizers though, both dry and liquids, so I am not organic.

One possible confusion about whether something is organic or not is how it is manufactured. Green Light brand Spinosad carries the OMRI (Organic Materials Review Institute) label but the Monterrey Chemical brand can't. The difference is how the two companies manufacture the products, even though they are essentially the same naturally occurring bacteria. "Organic" and "natural" are very ambiguous and deceptive terms. Arsenic is "natural". Nicotine is "organic" and "natural", but not necessarily something you wish to handle. I've found it quite manipulative and deceptive that the names "Bayer" (like the 'safe' aspirin brand we've all grown up with) and "Safer" (with its implied 'safe' connotation) have been used for some rather nasty products. Kim

I thought no spray was no toxic spray. I spray my roses with the hose every day in summer. Hee Hee. What the hey, you have to try and do the best you can. When I started out, I was spraying the toxics because the garden center sold you the bottle along with the bareroots in January.

One year I was so overrun by rust and BS and I was ready to run to the farm supply for chemical weapons. But I tried an idea here that helped. I trimmed back the plants and took off the leaves. I cleaned out the old mulch and put down new. I washed the plants off every morning if it was going to be sunny. That winter I cut everything very low, removed the mulch and put down new. I haven't had a bad situation like that since but if I did I would probably do the same thing. I know most of us say don't prune heavily and usually I don't. These days I'm removing most of the roses that get repeatedly sick. Sometimes, growing them in isolation from other roses does the trick for me. I'm not in a humid area though so I know I've got it easier than most.

A question that I have is what is a reasonably safe thing I can spray on the plants just after pruning when there are no leaves before I put the new mulch down for those roses that are most likely to get sick. Is there any such thing?

The great thing about GardenWeb is that if there is someone whose cultural practices are of interest to you, you can ASK them to clarify their position. You aren't stuck waffling on whether or not they can get away with growing that rose because they have their own ideas on what certain words mean.

Kittymoonbeam (are you a shirt tale relation to Moonunit Zap
pa?)

Serenade is non-toxic, OMRI approved and has worked very well for me.

Except for a plain water drench, No spray means no drench either. What other questions do you have?

sandandsun, inhalation of chemicals can result in blood levels. Particles landing on skin can lead to absorption and blood levels. Toxicity to mammals is not just ingestion, and the person would not die immediately. Carcinogenicity or teratogenic effects would be the issue. Disruption of the food chain, eco system, etc., due to effcts on insects and other lower organisms, etc. way tooooo complicated for me.
I just wanted to know what "no Spray" implied. My inference was that this did NOT relate to the drench.
THank you for all of the responses.

I think it's really interesting to read different peoples perceptions of what "no spray" is. It seems very much like someone labeling themselves or another, as vegetarian. Some vegetarians eat eggs, but no animal "meat". Some vegetarians eat seafood (don't get that one), but no mammal meat. Others won't even eat eggs, or anything with dairy products. Sure, there are more specific names - like Vegan, etc., but generally speaking, people still use the term vegetarian to refer to different acceptances of non vegetable products.

My biggest concern of sprays and drenches in the garden is potential harm to insects, birds and other animals, as well as offsetting the general balance of mother nature which seems a lot more intelligent than we mere humans sometimes. But again, I spray very toxic sprays like a maniac in the barn to protect the horses.

Probably doesn't matter what you call it. Do what you think is best for you and your situation.

ok....as long as i can still use MIRACLE GROW ( :

Susan----I think you got your answer, in a round about way. Watch this :) My garden is a no spray garden, 6 days a week.

We haven't used toxic sprays in years, and it's been several years since we even used oils.

I can't say we are "organic," because like Kim, we do make some use of chemical fertilizers. (And so would anyone else who had a gardenful of young, active, Dalmatian dogs.) Outside the areas the dogs can access, we do like to use horse manure.

I'm not much interested in what "label" I put on my garden. I'm far more concerned about keeping free of the sort of chemicals which triggered seizures in one of our earlier dogs. I won't chance that happening, again. Additionally, I have seen too many rosarians affected in their old age by various cancers. And if they make a dog seizure, it stands to reason in my book that they are not good for me, either.

My roses don't have to be perfect. If they are not reasonably "clean," they don't stay here -- but we find that the roses we are adding these days are, increasingly, quite clean without my intervention.

Jeri

Thank, Jeri. But sometimes people ask me how I grow such beautiful roses and I usually make the distinction of no spray. Now, I I guess I will say no spray of big guns. ....with a monthly drench. I use rotted manure, too. My Wheatens are not allowed in the back yard when the drench is used; i schedule their hair apt. on those days and keep them in the front for a few days after. Love Dalmations! Too me, any chemical that is "Cidal" is not going to be used around my dogs.

One of the 3 stooges...please note faint mustard stain on left of big face.

Honestly, Susan -- The Drenches can be far more dangerous than sprays.

We eliminated those when we still did limited spraying. Some of those chemicals persist in the soil for many years, and they are DANGEROUS.

I will never forget the look of horror on the face of a Consulting Rosarian, told by a nice lady at a Convention that she only used drenches ... and that she grew strawberries between her roses.

She served them to her husband . . .

I could find a reason to spray, at least hort oil.

I will never, ever again use a drench in our garden.

Jeri

I believe it. The label is gruesome. Remember DDT? Maybe I will try some of the others mentioned above and in other posts. The Spinosad looks interesting. I only have a few that are repeat offenders and I never have rust or other disease, and the bugs do not cause many problems. the black spot is just so ugly..

The Serenade also looks interesting, but requires a particle mask.....sorry I got off my own topic!!!!!! Flight of Ideas!

As I am on the other side of the world and also down under, can I ask what the definition of "drench" as is in a name and use.

Poured into the surrounding soil? Uptake and dissemination from vascular system of plant as opposed to topical application to leaves via spraying? A systemic.

To me, a spray application versus a drench application, organic versus inorganic and toxic versus non-toxic are distinctions without a difference. The intent and the desired result are the same in each case. The term non-toxic is a little bit of an oxymoron. The product is toxic to something, or it would not be employed.
As for me, I tend to think of no-spray gardens as gardens that have no (or minimal) application of any substance (sprayed or drenched) designed to control pests,fungus and or plant disease.
Molly

Good point, Molly.

You got it Molly.

And remember -- and a well-known exhibitor pointed this out ... ". . . cide" MEANS that the substance KILLS SOMETHING.

Susan -- Think on this ...
The SAFEST way to grow roses is to grow roses that do not require the application of any ". . . cide" to grow and bloom well in your garden.

Blackspot is rarely an issue here -- but we did have one rose that blackspotted overnight, and completely defoliated. It left us that week. We don't need that.

Our problems are powdery mildew and rust -- sometimes, downy mildew. If roses are so troubled by those fungal problems that they really look bad -- THEY leave us. There are too many roses that are not so-troubled.

Unless you are an avid exhibitor, you should be able to find roses that are not badly troubled by fungal disease. Grow THOSE roses, and leave off worrying about the ". . . cide" issue.

That's my two cents, FWIW, and feel free to ignore it.

:-)

Jeri

No, Jeri, you got it. Cidal kills/static slows the growth. Where is your zone?

I am on the Ventura County Coast, SoCal -- line-of-sight from the ocean. Our conditions are alkaline, and we are (or used to be) rarely really hot. Our winters are very mild (tho it sure feels cold this morning).

Our conditions are cool and humid air, with little rain. A coastal desert. It is less-than ideal for roses, (great for bougainvillea and cacti) but pretty nifty for people. :-)

Our common disease problems are powdery mildew and rust, but in danker weather, downy mildew pops up to be distressing.

Jeri

In 30 years of Rosing, I have only had one case of pm. Forget which rose but it is an own root. BS is the thorn in my side. Wish we could wave a magic wand and poof.
Thanks to everyone who responded.

There is a magic wand that we can wave.

It is called a shovel.

The problem is that many people are reluctant to use it. However, I have found it surprisingly effective against blackspot.

Lol. I become attached to my roses. It would take a few years of nonperformance and disease for me to kill one.

Mad Gallica is right.

In speaking to rose societies, DH and I have often asked audiences if they had some roses that were disease problems, while most were not.

Almost always, people say that, yes, that is the case.

Then, we tell them that we have a magic tool, which will eradicate those problems -- and we bring out a shovel. It gets a laugh -- but it does make some folks think about it.

You may have all sorts of reasons why you won't remove the "bad actors" in your rose garden -- but really ... are they worth your LIFE? Or the life of your dog? Or Cat? Or your child? I just don't think so.

There are thousands of different rose cultivars, and many of them will be resistant to the "disease du jour" for your conditions. THOSE are the roses you should grow.

They will be different roses than the ones who are disease free for ME, but there ARE some. Grow those.

Jeri

I understand becoming attached to your roses, particularly if it's something you've coveted for a long time and sought far and wide to obtain. Been there, got over it. When time, energy, water and room were seemingly free and endless, I could excuse bad behavior, but as constraints on all of them increased and I began raising more and more of my own creations, that behavior and lack of performance became increasingly inexcusable. I have a sincere issue justifying using increasingly precious water to support any plant which is obviously unhappy living with me. As I posted earlier, if I hold my own seedlings to high standards and demand they perform and behave to justify their positions and resources, why shouldn't I hold others' creations to the same standard? I've been the "caretaker" and nursed things along which required the extra expense of time and resources, and delighted in the begrudged flowers they provided. No more. As Jeri stated, I'll use that "magic wand" to eliminate the garden problems and delight in the "pound puppy roses"...those which are happy to be with me and grateful for a place to grow. Kim

And it's true, too, that some of MY best roses are "pound puppies." (So are my dogs, but that's another issue.)

We find that roses which have managed to survive on their own for as much as a century, with no care and no water but what nature provided (which in CA, and be "not much") are the roses which perform best for us.

Why would I grow things that mildew, when I can grow "Jesse Hildreth," "Elisabeth's China," "Legacy Of The Richardson Family" and "John Pearce," and have perfectly healthy roses?

Jeri

My cats do dig. Not as bad as dogs, but they dig a bit bury their waste, like in a litter box. My one cat also chases chipmunks and I've seen him dig by their holes, which sometimes are near my roses :( And they love to rub up against rose canes with thorns. I guess it's like being scratched.

Omg....that Jesse Hildreth is tooooo die for.

"Legacy Of The Richardson Family" ain't no slouch, either. :-)

Jeri

So beautiful. Where might I find these? Is that a setter or a springer? If they are bands, would they make it thru my zone 5 winter? Where I live, finding a mature Double Delight is a big deal. Lol.

Susan, neither of these is in commerce. They're growing in some public gardens, and maybe in the next few years there may be a small number of plants, but . . .

Truth is, we have lost so many small specialty nurseries, there aren't enough left to bring out some of these more recent discoveries. We concentrate on sharing them locally, so that they may not be lost.

Jeri

Susan, these roses are beautiful and they have proven themselves survivors in OUR climates. That does not give any clue what to expect from them in YOURS. Black spot pressure here, even at its worst, is probably significantly less than your norm. There have been roses which were dawgs for me that have been splendid for Jeri, and vice versa. We are only 35.24 miles from one another, and we're basically in the same zone 10a, but there are worlds differences between our two specific climates. She has tremendously greater marine influence, more fog, higher humidity, more sunless days and sometimes more than 25 degrees cooler summer temps than here, yet we're the same 'zone'. If the performance of same rose can vary greatly between us, I shudder to think what the difference could be between Jeri's place and yours. Kim

Thanks for that, Kim ...

What I was trying to say is that the roses I mentioned are great HERE. They would almost certainly not be the best choices for YOUR conditions.

The trick is to find out which roses are care-free in YOUR climate and microclimate. We've come to many of our choices by trial and error, and we learned a long, long time ago to cut our losses if a rose does not mature into healthy disease-free growth after 3-4 years. And some roses which are great in NoCal are not good in my part of SoCal.

Now, if our neighbor wanted to grow roses, I could tell her exactly what she needed -- but you need to find out what does well where you are.

Jeri

Yes ma'am, that was precisely my point. These found roses flourished in specific conditions and places where they received at least the minimum of what they required. It wasn't so much their lack of need for water or care as it was where they grew, they received what they needed, whether it was sufficient year round ground water; frequency of rains; the perfect situation of growing under a drip line of a large tree with deep leaf mulch and beneficial dew collection and drop along the drip zone, etc. And, in climates which suited them. Take any one of them from those conditions and put them in substantially hotter, colder or wetter situations and they may collapse as readily as the latest failure from the nursery. Of course, the only way to find out it is to try them and satisfy the curiosity. My hope was simply to prevent unrealistic expectations. Kim

Now if we could just get nurseries and garden centers to carry pound puppy roses

Many specialty nurseries have, beginning with Vintage. Unfortunately, what's a pound puppy rose in one climate, isn't necessarily one in another. Excellent case in point is Grandmother's Hat. She's bullet proof around here, but experiences black spot elsewhere. It's the same story as with every other rose, no one is perfect everywhere. Kim

Kim Said: ". . . no one is perfect everywhere."

And that, really, is the point. MY right rose is someone else's WRONG rose.

We do ourselves a disservice when we insist on planting roses that are wrong for our conditions, and trying to make them work by using chemical solutions.

When we, instead, find the right roses for our climate, and grow THOSE, we've given ourselves a leg up on success.

Jeri

Just to round off this discussion (since this thread has been brought up for recent consideration), sometimes you have to ask some posters what they mean when they use a certain term.

I have several times suspected that some posters who brag about being "non-sprayers" do use the Bayer drench which they classify as a non-spray--whereas "non-spray" to me means not using a fungicide, regardless of whether it is sprayed or drenched.

Similar confusion sometimes occurs over the terms "disease-resistant" or "BS-resistant." I have noticed several times that some posters seem to mean that as a result of spraying a fungicide, the rose had no disease problems. In other words, to them, a rose that has disease problems is a rose that was sprayed with a fungicide but still has BS problems. To me, BS-resistant would refer to a rose that is not sprayed or drenched (usually) and does not exhibit much BS problems most of the time.

Another area of confusion is pesticide or insecticide. The organic soil posters often include fungicides with those terms. To me, a pesticide/insecticide is different from a fungicide--so I would use two separate terms.

But I will confess to contributing to some of the confusion on occasion since by "disease-resistant," I mean "BS-resistant" (the main disease my roses contend with) 90% of the time, but about 10% of the time, I use "Disease-resistant" in the much broader designation--all or many diseases, and not just BS-resistant--although I think I always include BS resistant in that broader category. The California growers sometimes throw me when they talk about "disease-resistant" since they often do NOT have BS on their minds and therefore are not including it in the broader term.

So, yes, sometimes you just gotta ask what that person means. : )

Kate