Good news about Little White Pet. I just ordered this one, and the comments I read before ordering said it did very well in the heat. Now you're confirming that!

I'm with you, Ingrid. My current climate is much "milder" than the old one...on paper. In the few years I've gardened here, it's has increasingly become more like the mid desert, rather than the savannah it has historically been. The roses and other plants which can't endure, are rotating out of here. I've already removed three, large, well-established English roses and replaced them with Grevillea, Calliandra californica, dwarf polygala, Eremophila and a few others. They receive a fraction of the water, are providing more color per square foot than the English roses did and aren't complaining about the heat and intense sun. The World is changing around us. If we want to continue succeeding, we'd better get in step with it. Kim

I was just walking through my garden this morning Ingrid, and just dumbfounded that in mid May the majority of my blooms are long gone, or fried to oblivion. Our May weather has been classic mid/late summer weather, and really crazy hot. I was thinking same thing - this is what I'd expect in July / August, not in May. I hate to think what our summer will be like this year.

I'm not ready to make changes in the garden yet - I love all my roses, and if I have to just love them in April, and then again for a few months before winter, so be it. But ... a barren May is pretty depressing.

I've mentioned this before, but National Geographic years ago had an article on how the American west was settled during a 100 year wet cycle and that wet cycle is now ending. If that's true, that along with globule warming will wreak double havoc on the west.

Here we have the double whammy of farmers and developers draining our wetlands along with global warming. Farmers have all but ruined the Evergades. We have salt water intrusion in our wells on the coast and many of our beautiful springs have dried up. If this isn't stopped, we will have salt water intrusion further inland and Florida will become a desert, so I know what you're going through, Ingrid. I can't think about this too much or my head will explode. I just sent a long rant about it to our governor, which I'm sure he won't read.

Great thread, Ingrid. I focus on quality rather than quantity. Once I killed some eyesores, I am so much happier. My zone 5a winter "mercy killed" one mini-rose. I'm happy, since I don't have to baby that wimpy root.

I keep top growth small via less fertilizer, thus less salt. I focus on big root, which survives both winter and drought. My focus changes from getting the roses I want, to getting the soil I want.

My experiment of mixing cocoa mulch into hard clay is a success: after 1 month, it's half-rotted, with fluffy & moist soil, tons of earthworms. Let's see how big my tomato roots get with cocoa mulch's high potassium, plus phosphorus & trace elements that my alkaline clay lacks.

As to the many-petals roses I lust after, I cut pics. from Austin' catalog and paste them on a wall-border in one room, that way I can enjoy their beauty without taking care of them. I only need a few REAL roses to enjoy their scents ... the rest is just imaginary lust & greed. =)!

Ceth_K from Malaysia offered a great tip to conserve water in hard-crust clay soil: poking breathe holes. It's the same principle I use to aerate my lawn with a machine that punch holes in the soil. With breathe holes, grass is greener since air and water can reach the roots.

In 2004 drought here, those who fertilized their lawn were the ones who had to water, plus replacing the dead grass next spring. Dumping salt via fertilizer and forcing roses to grow in the heat go against nature.

In my zone 5a, we stop fertilizing 3 months before hard frost. Odinthor in zone 10 CA gave an excellent tip: No fertilizer after June 1. Roses in hot climate need a rest just as much as roses in cold zone.

Here's what I wrote to thank Ceth_K for her excellent tip of poking breathe holes in hard-crust clay soil: "THANK YOU, It works wonder in my rock-hard limestone clay. I wasted water in the past, since it flooded over my roses, rather than sinking in.

Yesterday I poked holes around my roses with a bamboo stick. It broke ! So I use metallic skewers for grilling and pokes holes around my roses. Every drop of water went in, instead of flooding to the side.

We get the greenest lawn by aerating yearly with a machine that pulled out plugs from our heavy clay. The neighbor only fertilizes, and his lawn can't compare.

Poking holes into the soil allows oxygen and nitrogen to penetrate, so roots can breathe, and plants green up fast. It saves water with no run off. "

Here is a link that might be useful: Poking breathe holes in hard clay soil

This post was edited by Strawberryhill on Tue, May 14, 13 at 11:37

I constantly remind myself that this is what my area looked like before the humans showed up:

{{gwi:273928}}

{{gwi:273929}}

Reality check!

And, this is at the END of a century long "wet cycle". Scary stuff, huh? Kim

Kim's idea of replacing roses that don't do well with drought-tolerant plants is an excellent one. I had already replaced my Reve d'Or which I'd put in a spot that was sure to kill it with vitex, which is doing very well. I'm going to be visiting my local nursery for more flowering plants that will like it here which won't need nearly as much water as an added bonus.

Toward the end of summer I'm going to make a list here of the roses that have done well in the heat for anyone who is gardening in similar conditions. Recently planted bands that I haven't allowed to bloom such as Heirloom, Devoniensis, La France, Lady Alice Stanley, Poulsen's Pink and Pink Soupert will be far enough along to evaluate, but what I've seen of them so far has been encouraging. I'm not by any means giving up my roses but they will have to be good performers in the heat to make the grade.

I'd love to here what roses are doing very well for you in the heat as a possible future addition to my garden. We can all help each other to make the situation a little less dire, and to still have roses we can truly enjoy.

Ingrid

I'm sorry you've taken out some favorites, Ingrid. I would hesitate in revamping my garden only on the basis of a few weeks of weather. We're having some unusual weather here, too. It will be in the low 40's tonight - unheard of! In April we had a week of 90 degree temps! Weather is so cyclical and sometimes wacky. Our conditions here lately have been so bad as to pretty much ruin the spring flush - thrips, 6 days of rain in spring which is our dry season. Clotilde Soupert was a mess and ruined, but she's blooming again with no problems.

In your regular conditions I totally understand how roses are planted on a trial basis, and I understand that water in the desert is precious, but in the grand scheme of things your garden doesn't consume that much. Just curious..,are you on a well or central water system? I will offer a suggestion, if I may, for conserving water. A micro system really does use far less water than hand watering with better results - at least in my garden. I read that it uses 13% of the water that a regular irrigation system uses. It might be worth the switch. You may even be able to set it for twice a day.

I think the folks in Minnesota who have ice flowing into their homes now would argue against the global warming issue. Weather is wacky!! And folks can save their keystrokes and not make an argument out of my comment. I know I don't live out there - just saying.

Sherry

Here is a link that might be useful: If only sweat were irrigation...

I'm thankful that antique rose growers didn't rip out their roses in the 70s when we were told about global cooling and the coming ice age! ;-)

Thank you, Ingrid for a great thread that inspired me to solve my own problems here. I begin to question alfalfa meal after seeing how plants become yellow in both University of Mass. experiment, and University of Kentucky's experiment. Both used alfalfa pellets on top.

I planted 2 geraniums: The geranium in my clay is big & lots of flowers & lush and dark green. The geranium in the hole fixed with peat moss and alfafa meal is fried, wilted, yellowish. It's a heat-burn. Digging that hole up 6 months later, zero earthworms.

I checked the Organic Gardening Forum, and found a post "Alfalfa meal heating up the soil ...". Mike_prevost, zone 7, wrote " But if you put a lot of alfalfa meal under mulch or in a hole, it gets REAL hot in a couple of days. Like as hot as a very hot compost pile. 150 deg F or so. "

I put grass clippings in bags in my garage and the entire garage heated up in our freezing late fall. That solved my puzzle of why mixing alfalfa meal and peat moss with my clay becomes concrete. Making potteries out of clay requires heating in a kiln, and putting organics in the hole does just that. I also like this view:

â¢Posted by marshallz10 z9-10 CA
From my experience as a long-time professional horticulturist/landscaper/organic farmer, you folks are using way too much high-N organic material. Most of the N will go off as gas or wash out as nitrate -- plants don't have that great of need for N. Moreover, if the organic material is concentrated at depth, lack of oxygen will cause the material to go sour (anaerobic fermentation) and give off toxic gases and liquids. ... I grow a lot of cool/cold-season crops. Optimum germination temperatures are less than 75F, most less than 70F. You can't get lettuce to germinate at higher soil temperatures."

I haven't figured out why cocoa mulch mixed with my limestone clay produces moist soil, lots of earthworm. Due to late frost here, I can't plant tomatoes until June 1 .... cocoa mulch will be totally decomposed by then.

See below link for a picture of a very chlorotic marigold topped with alfalfa pellets in University of Mass. experiment. Alfalfa meal gunks up above in my clay soil/ wet weather ... that's why I punch breathe holes.

Here is a link that might be useful: University of Mass experiment on fertilizers

This post was edited by Strawberryhill on Tue, May 14, 13 at 13:58

Perhaps with regular higher relative humidity, and denser soils, the micro systems and drip may be sufficient. I haven't found that the case in these soils and climates. The evaporation rate is just too tremendous and the high drainage rates too high for the amount of water they supply. I water by hose, I have to. The rodents and coyotes EAT any other method of water distribution other than metal and the water corrodes metals unless they're copper. I meter the water jealously because I not only don't want to waste it, but I also don't want a high water bill.

Even with my miserly water application, heat, sun intensity and drainage issues, there are roses which perform. Those have earned their places and will remain as long as they continue being suitable for the conditions. It doesn't matter whether they are own root or budded. Some simply require much more water to not only flower as desired, but also to remain fungus free. Too little water can easily result in mildew, rust and I'm sure, black spot.

I wouldn't begrudge the others their greater water demands as intensely if it were only for a few weeks, but these issues are now beginning in March and continuing through late October, into November. Each of the past few years, the heat, aridity and wind have pushed back earlier and earlier. It now covers my entire "bloom period", though most of those I grow will continue flowering pretty much twelve months of the year. At least in the cooler months, a bit of rain has been able to be counted on. But, who knows how much and for how much longer? Wasting more water on plants of any kind which just are not cooperative and definitely not happy with me is against my gardening ethics. It destroys the pleasure I derive from growing them. Kim

In the 1880's, a multi-year drought here brought to an end the "Rancho Period" with its cattle-hide-based economy.

I'm relatively certain that in the years preceding that drought, and following it, Southern California was, STILL, not lush and green.

Many areas here were not developed at all until water projects allowed this area to use water from other areas -- and we would probably be better off today if that extensive development had not occurred.

HoovB -- Our hillsides naturally looked much like yours -- with the exception of acres and acres of prickly-pear cactus. There were coastal live oaks, but almost all of those are gone -- to be replaced by many, many highly-flammable Eucalyptus. And it was interesting, during the recent Camarillo Springs fire, to see the housing developments tucked up right into the hilly wild land, AND surrounded by Eucalyptus. INSANITY.

We will always have roses here, but fewer of them than we once had. We can't count on rainwater in the winter, and irrigation water costs more with every passing year. :-(

Jeri

Sherry, I also don't want to discuss global warming at great length, but in regard to Minnesota and northern Europe, the cold and wet they're having more and more of (including New York etc.) were exactly what the global warming experts predicted more than ten years ago, when there wasn't any sign of that yet. After considerable reading and research, I see everything happening that was predicted, and I'm basing my actions on that and not on a few weeks of anomalous weather. The coming years will show us what the reality is, but for now not having to look at miserable and shriveling roses is a bonus for me. Kim is right about drip watering in our weather, and about the fact that it doesn't work, been there and done that in another garden. The majority of my roses will remain, and to have some new and interesting drought-tolerant plants tucked in here and there will be fun.

Ingrid

Oh Lord,
Helpth me to plant a water wise, fire wise,
appropriate garden!

Helpeth me to turn my back on lawn,
reject roses, cull clematis, and hate hydrangeas!

Maketh my shovel busy and my watering can dusty!

Just not yet!

Sub3k, the 1972 paper, Rasool and Schneider, to which you refer, relied on a climate model that used very rudimentary data, simplistic systems, and less computer power than is found in a typical kid's toy these days. It was also premised on invalid assumptions, as other scientists pointed out soon after it was published. Based on criticisms, Schneider reviewed the paper's findings, reworked the model, and published a correction in 1975 that reversed the cooling prediction (the media seems to have missed this later event).

I would also like to point out that this was science working as science is supposed to work, not "proof", as deniers disingenuously would have it, that current climate models, constructed with far more comprehensive and sophisticated data and systems and vastly more computing power, must also be a bunch of malarkey.

As Ingrid points out, current climate models seem to be predicting actual but anomalous trends rather well.

In any case, I'm sure antique roses will survive somewhere. A revelation to me were the roses, such as those in old cemeteries, that could survive with no irrigation and no summer rain whatsoever. Alba Odorata, Mme. Lombard, La Nymphe, Old Red Runaround, Old Blush, to name a few I have been able to identify. These are some bona fide rose candidates for a water-thrifty garden!

Yes, and...no. If you look where these things have been "discovered", you frequently also find the mitigating circumstances which permitted them to survive. I collected Striped La France in the El Dorado Cemetery where the old plant grew under the drip zone of an enormous oak tree. There was a very deep, oak leaf litter which maintained a cool, damp root run. Any fogs or rains which occurred certainly dripped off the canopy of the tree, watering the plant.

Some have been found beside old foundations which also helped collect moisture or provided shade, reflected heat preventing freezing or protection from winds. I'm sure if more investigation had been done, many would have been found in areas with decent ground water.

Most species are generally found where water collects and runs toward streams and rivers and where the levels under the soil are sufficiently close to the surface to support them. Or, they are found where there are sufficient fogs which collect in their foliage and provide the needed water. Minutifolia is one of these. There are always other circumstances which enable the "found roses" to survive. None of them have been found here in the middle of an arid, waterless field with no other features or plants providing them some sort of support to survive. Not to say these 'foundlings' aren't tough survivors, but they DO require resources to survive. We just forget to take notice of what around them enabled them to be there for us to 'find them'. Kim

Very good points, Kim. Not to be macabre, but tomb stones no doubt collect condensation and provide shade, too.

Plus, amount of winter rain makes a difference, even if the dry season is equally long: my Mom's "drought" season in Santa Rosa, with around 38" of rain typical for a winter, is not nearly as severe as mine where there's just 14" during the winter. So, rose survival in cemeteries in Sonoma County would be less surprising, probably, than they would be down here.

Hydraulic lift of water from depth via "leaky" oak roots is another well-documented drought-mitigating feature of oak canopies. I have a 'Golden Wings' just under a valley oak canopy that gets by with less watering than roses in ostensibly more favorable situations.

I admire your attitude, Ingrid. I look forward to hearing about your conclusions and successes later in the season.

Another thought would be to do more with the water we have already used aka gray water. Using soil appropriate chemicals in washing and reusing that water is an example. No need to use it once and send it off to the water treatment plant. We save when we reuse it.

It can be challenging to find happy natives for your garden it there is irrigation, some what only poor dry soil to thrive and then only thrive in a manner we recognize for a short time.

Here is a link that might be useful: California Natives

Another thought would be to do more with the water we have already used aka gray water. Using soil appropriate chemicals in washing and reusing that water is an example. No need to use it once and send it off to the water treatment plant. We save when we reuse it.

It can be challenging to find happy natives for your garden it there is irrigation, some what only poor dry soil to thrive and then only thrive in a manner we recognize for a short time.

Here is a link that might be useful: California Natives

Hi Kippy: Good idea! I save all my kitchen water for the garden too. Ingrid is right about the warming trend. 100 degrees in her garden on Mother's Day? It's 90 degrees today, May 14, in my zone 5a. A month ago it's snow and hail.

Last year heat was brutal (104 in Chicagoland). I have regrets about my new full-sun rose bed .... most likely I'll put some tomatoes there. Any future rose bed I make will be partial shade, morning sun.

I hope that some roses can grow big roots like trees, if the soil is loamy. I haven't watered my 26 trees for years, only 2 died since I didn't fix that spot with coarse sand, it's rock-hard clay there.

Coarse sand is best for heavy clay. I tried everything: leaves, grass clippings, peat moss, horse manure, humus, lava rocks, compost, pine barks, free bark chips, hard wood mulch.... everything glue up in my limestone clay after a year. Only coarse sand STAYS fluffy, and breaks up clay even after 12 years.

This post was edited by Strawberryhill on Tue, May 14, 13 at 22:54

hoovb, that was very funny. We all want to hang on to what we love for as long as we possibly can. That certainly includes me. I simply can't imagine my garden without roses. That's where my eyes always go first when I step out the door.

I respect and admire the wisdom and thoughtfulness shown in this thread. Change is inevitable, whatever the reasons for it may be, and I believe we can share our knowledge and experience on this thread so that we can go ahead in the coming years with roses that are tough and healthy, even under adverse conditions. Some of us may have to have fewer roses, but quality will make up for quantity, and they will still be the most precious part of our gardens.

Ingrid

"I would also like to point out that this was science working as science is supposed to work, not "proof", as deniers disingenuously would have it, that current climate models, constructed with far more comprehensive and sophisticated data and systems and vastly more computing power, must also be a bunch of malarkey."

First, the term "denier" is a derogatory term (not to mention inaccurate) and really has no place in a civil discussion. If you must fall back on labels I prefer the term: "objective people who have not been convinced."

Second they way science "works" is that studies are done and scientists have peer reviews and publish their findings so that other scientist can review the data, its manipulations and recreate the results. "Climate Science" is unusual in that the data is considered proprietary and not required to be published.

The whole "Climategate" scandal was based on scientists trying to keep their raw data secret even after it was determined that it should be available through government freedom of information acts. Of course, one of the main reason they didn't want to turn it over is because that much of the original uncorrupted, un-manipulated temperature data that many, many studies are based on has been lost and longer exists. How embarrassing for them--especially as you point out our modern computer prowess. Suggesting that current climate science is any type of model of the scientific process is really unfortunate.

I wouldn't be surprised in 40 years if we look back at today's "unsophisticated and limited computer capabilities" and laugh that when we were still unable to reliably model weather variables to predict the weather 10 days out that we were rather naive to think we understood the even greater number of variables in climate determination and were able to model them to predict climate years in advance.

And for the record I think we are warming. Indiana was under a mile of ice as recently as 10,000 years ago--a blink of the eye in geologic time. Since I've actually driven through Indiana I feel pretty comfortable with identifying a warming trend.

Zone 9b is a horror this year. We were running air in April just to keep the house at 80. Most of the heat tolerant roses on my full sun side yard have shut down bloom already and first flush was instantly fried. Very weird.

The information on alfalfa is interesting. I have relied on alfalfa and fish meal for most of my spring fertilizing. Maybe I should be rethinking that. Mary

subk3, well, I'll admit that folks in my field (ecology) and my husband's (experimental high energy particle physics) tend to be blunt (and consequently thick-skinned), but I hear that mathematicians are much nastier. ;-) I probably should try to soften my terms when speaking to others. I do get annoyed when Stephen Schneider's work is misrepresented.

This is not the place to address your charges, which are more or less inaccurate and have a certain air of familiarity. It would be fruitless, anyway. You can take comfort that William Happer is still on your side, but be warned that Richard Lindzen has been waffling a bit lately.

I say, let us both enjoy the roses while we can.

This post was edited by catspa on Wed, May 15, 13 at 1:40

Here in the SE in zone 7, we are experiencing the complete opposite. Much cooler than normal weather and a lot of rain, too much, if I can say that.

My roses are finally starting to bloom. It's been a frustrating spring. Although I love not having to run the AC.

Last year, our spring flush was over and done the first week of May. Yesterday, I had the heat on in the car in the AM. The more things change, the more they stay the same.

Hi Catspa: I'm on your side. I got nit-picked plenty on info. that I researched. Never mind my B.S. in Computer Science and minor in Chemistry. Some people like to contribute by nit-picking the info. that others present.

It's frustrating to spend hours researching on data of University Extensions across the country, doing experiments, taking pictures, then got shot down. THANK YOU, Tuggy3, for being open-minded.

I wasted $45 on alfalfa meal, it hurt in my hard clay, rather than helping. I also wasted $30 on chemicals to kill crabgrass, when I could had pulled them more effectively by hands. My posting is to help others NOT to make the same mistakes I did.

Here in zone 5a, I tested late-fall fertilization by mounding horse manure, alfalfa meal, and dirt on roses before the ground froze. Then I use zero fertilizer in spring, except my two favorites: Sonia Rykiel and Annie L. McDowell, which I gave SOLUBLE, low-salt monopotassium phosphate, NPK 0-52-34. Amazing basal breaks, tons of buds.

The other roses with zero fertilizer in spring cope with this week-long heat of 80 to 90 degrees well. I don't water them. Below is water-hog Pat Austin, which I haven't watered this year, picture taken today, May 15:

I've reread this thread a few times. I've tried to read it from an open minded place, but I can't help my gut reaction of cynicism.

We're a rose forum. So - is what we're saying is in this thread, is, lets think about tossing the roses because of global warming? Yes, I'm terribly oversimplifying...but ... that is the essense of what I'm feel like I'm reading.

If you want to toss roses because you're not happy with them - toss them. We all have varying opinions on that - some say - hurrah, some say terribly wasteful. We are all entitled to our opinions. And we are all entitled to have the gardens that we personally want.

But, to use global warming as a reason to cull more roses, but keep the ones you like? Really?

Interesting post-Ingrid it is always sad when rose lovers lose a favoite rose---- for the past few years my garden has been pretty much one of survival (health reasons) and most of my roses have survived quite well until the last couple of years when RRD is taking a toll----
I'm trying to just appreciate the roses that are still with me.

Florence

I think most people tend to interpret data based on their own personal experiences, which include educational background. The data is there but the interpretation differs. I see elements of truth in all your statements. âÂÂWeatherâ is indeed âÂÂwackyâ as Sherry said. And itâÂÂs also true that the experts often donâÂÂt interpret the data correctly as floridarosez noted:

âÂÂNational Geographic years ago had an article on how the American west was settled during a 100 year wet cycle and that wet cycle is now ending.âÂÂ

And again, as subk3 alluded to: âÂÂI'm thankful that antique rose growers didn't rip out their roses in the 70s when we were told about global cooling and the coming ice age!âÂÂ

I well-remember that prediction by the experts.

But I think we can all agree with Kim and Sherry and Ingrid and Buford that we are experiencing changes. As to whether these changes are part of a 100-year trend or a 1,000-year cycle or whether they are global warming for the next 10,000 years, I donâÂÂt see how we can know. We can certainly find data upon which to base our beliefs, but we also know from history that sometimes the prevailing scientific view turns out to be accurate and sometimes it doesnâÂÂt.

Kim pointed out:
âÂÂwe are now beginning in March and continuing through late October, into November. Each of the past few years, the heat, aridity and wind have pushed back earlier and earlier. It now covers my entire "bloom period", though most of those I grow will continue flowering pretty much twelve months of the year.âÂÂ

This seems to be more than just weather change and suggests a certain amount of climate change.

Whatever happens after we are all gone from this earth, we would do well follow the advice of our rose experts on this forum and start now changing our habits in whatever way we can. IâÂÂm certainly going to be more diligent in using mulch and gray water. Thanks for the spur on that subject. Lou

Thanks, Lou. I don't call it anything, because, who actually knows? Whether it's a short cycle or the end/beginning of a longer one, HERE, the heat is beginning earlier; spiking higher; lasting longer; "winter" is becoming a non issue with significantly milder averages and spikes in nearly spring and fall heat; rains aren't happening. Wind, which is an ever-present "feature", seems more of an issue when there is precious little ground water and virtually no replenishment. Yes, I AM removing specific roses which are definitely not happy with the new weather reality here.

It is a natural extension of "grow what's happy to be where you are", what is suitable for your conditions. For whatever reason, I (and many others here) am watching conditions change rather dramatically. It impresses ME (and this 'judgement' is for me, in my conditions, in my garden only) as foolish and wasteful, being a bad steward of my resources, to attempt to create a different zone, a different climate, to make things happy where they are obviously not. You CAN grow penguins in the desert, but at what cost?

Is this really any different from removing roses because the humidity and rain are increasing, raising the disease pressures past the tolerance of the variety? Or, shovel pruning those which used to hang in through winters, but now are suffering increasing winter damage to the point of no longer pleasing?

At one time, it was possible to pick fruit from several types of black berries. That hasn't been possible for the past three years. There hasn't been sufficient temperatures for them to flower. They grow like wild fire, but simply will not flower, so they are gone. Only one lilac continues to flower, so the others have been sent where they can happily flower. You don't waste room, water and other resources growing roses which refuse to flower where you are, just as you don't plant peonies, hosta, daphne and many others where they are sure to fail. I see no difference removing roses which suffer and fail to perform in the increased (and increasing) aridity and heat. Kim

Kim Said:
"You don't waste room, water and other resources growing roses which refuse to flower where you are, just as you don't plant peonies, hosta, daphne and many others where they are sure to fail. I see no difference removing roses which suffer and fail to perform in the increased (and increasing) aridity and heat. Kim"

*** That is the bottom line.

As long as I live, I will want to grow roses.

The day may come, however, (almost certainly WILL come) when we can't afford to water them, all up and down the hill -- and we could be forced to reduce rose numbers to the handful we can grow on the top levels, with the aid of graywater.

We think about that, when we select roses. They've got to be tough cookies. My dogs are rescues -- and so you might say are our roses. But they work FOR US.

Jeri

Jeri mentions growing roses up and down her hill. That's never been a possibility for me. In the beginning I planted 12 noisettes partway down the hill, with my husband laboriously digging huge holes for them, which were well-mulched and continually hand-watered. Every one of them died due to heat stress. I'm much further inland than Jeri and live in an extra-hot microclimate. I've gardened on one level ever since but now there are roses that are declining here because of the increasing heat. I'm not keeping the roses that I like; I'm keeping the ones that will still consent to grow in my garden. Sister Elizabeth was one of my favorite roses, but to keep a rose that looks as though it's died while it's still planted in the ground and being watered has frankly given me emotional pain.

Ingrid

I rather new to roses. Different classes of roses take different quantity of water I know, but do different sizes of roses also require different amounts of water? I would assume so but I have never noticed that being mentioned. I prefer the large climbers myself, but maybe I need to start ordering more bushes and some mini's. We have been in a severe drought in the last couple years so maybe I just need to change my "want list" to a smaller/mini's plants with the color/type using less water. And No I am not tossing any roses, just trying to adapt to the weather.
I do use my gray water for the other side of the house which is all shade plants but not my roses which is on the uphill side of the drainline.
I don't participate much but I love all the views, ideas and pictures on GW. Thanks for being such a helpful bunch of roselovers.

Watering - I ran soaker hose throughout my front bed, which has irises and 3 roses, and a sprinkling of other stuff in there. Our summer hot hasn't really arrived yet. We've had a few days of 90's weather, but mostly 7-'s and 80's. So far, I run the soaker all day long (12 hours) once a week, and the whole bed is thriving nicely. As the weather heats up, I'll shorten the interval between soakings. I also have 3 bags of bark to put down to keep the water around longer and the worms happier.

Two things have been water savers for me

Planting where the roses get enough sun to bloom and grow but then get shade the rest of the day so that the soil isn't hit by the sun the rest of the time.

Putting on thicker layers of mulch and then setting flat stones, rocks and boards over it all to keep roots cool. Anything that shades the soil has been a big help.

As Strawberry said, coarse sand has helped to open up the clay and get the water in so it doesn't run off.

Ingrid said:
" I'm not keeping the roses that I like; I'm keeping the ones that will still consent to grow in my garden . . . to keep a rose that looks as though it's died while it's still planted in the ground and being watered has frankly given me emotional pain. "

*** Ingrid, I know exactly what you are talking about.
And I think you're right.
I can't change my climate. I can adjust, but not completely alter my environment. I have to grow roses that will grow where I am, or feel that I'm guilty of rose-torture.

Jeri

Harmony -- I think you mis-understand.

In my area, we are facing a diminished and increasingly-pricy water supply. In this situation, it is necessary to make choices, and to grow roses intelligently.

Life is filled wth trade-offs. My dedication to roses is not lessened if I select more carefully, or even reduce the numbers in my garden.

Jeri

'Life is filled with trade-offs. My dedication to roses is not lessened if I select more carefully, or even reduce the numbers in my garden.'

Of course not!

Moving from a sunny allotment to a shady poplar plantation is surely nothing to do with climate but everything to do with location and geographical conditions and like it or not, I will be bidding adieu to nearly ALL my roses apart from the best (in my opinion) which, fortuitously happen to be my treasured wildlings. And even then, roses such as moyesii are just not going to manage, even around the edges. But hey, I am a gardener and the world is full of fabulous plants: even in a poplar wood there are campions, umbellifers, flag iris, bluebells, wild arums, water mints, agrimony, willowherb..........and I have not even lifted a hand. Just wait till the seed orders are sent in........and a bit of chainsawing and judicious felling.

Ingrid, the climate changes are neither here nor there - what is mostly apparent is your changing attitudes to plants and their place in the world - this is, I think, a sign of increasing knowledge and experience and (should) happen to us all ....as long as we remain open to learning new things, staying curious and directed and mostly, situating ourselves somewhere in the middle of our little worlds and not perched at the top of the life tree in all-knowing judgmental superiority.

What is the problem with the moyesii? I have 'Geranium' on the north side of a wild swamp, and it does fine so long as I keep the multiflora cleared away. by far the greatest threat to its existence is the town Department of Transportation, but they seem to mysteriously know it is there, and have effectively cleared the multiflora away from it on more than one occasion. So it is very much something I would expect to be able to handle the edge of a clearing.

Hi Ingrid: I feel your frustration, it gets hot here too .. 80 to 90 degrees for the entire week. The perky ones are what people mentioned as heat-loving: Frederic Mistral, Evelyn, Mary Magdalene, Lynnie, and Romanticas. The ones in partial shade are perky.

I have a center bed that I got away with zero watering for 6 years, because I made it a "shallow swimming pool" by digging a 5" trench, put "Professional black plastic edging" sold at Home Depot, put newspaper next to that, then put brick on top. Own-root roses love it, but Dr. Huey hates it.

I did the same to a very hilly area, I don't need to water that either. Recently I use brown-paper grocery bags under the bricks, they look nicer. Only the lifetime-guaranteed thick edging sold at HomeDepot works, other types of $$$ edging failed, and grass went inside.

Hi Kittymoonbeam: Check out my most recent experiment. I made Sonia Rykiel, aka Mrs. droopy-neck, perky in my alkaline, limestone clay by putting sulfur plus gypsum (calcium sulfate) on the surface, then water it in.

Sulfur brings down my pH of 7.7, to release the potassium and phosphorus for blooming. Calcium in gypsum works with potassium for maximum osmotic pressure and rigidity of cell wall. Below is Sonia after a week of 90-80 degrees heat, full-sun:

Well Hey, Mads - good news that moyesii is more responsive to damp partial shade than I had imagined. This whole woodsy thing is going to be a massive learning experience for me (and having grown moyesii at the sunny end of a wide-open allotment, I just sort of....... assumed........it would be a sun-lover.
A few years ago, I used to read a blog about woodland roses - Kent somebody - which seems to have vanished, right when I really need it now.
I have a south-facing woodland boundary which overlooks a stream and a water meadow, currently choked out by bramble and nettle - I am going to have to hack and reclaim some territory, inch by inch, using every method known to humanity, but I am determined to create an iconic Norfolk garden (heaps of umbellifers, willowherbs and purple moor grass) - have been sowing the most marvellous dark angelica (Ebony Superior) and white epilobium and hoping the sweetbriars and ayreshires will ramble in an insane profusion - so far, only in my (over-active) imagination.