Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Old 24-05-2009, 09:49 PM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jun 2007
Posts: 21
Default Rose Bushes ?

I am not much of a gardner at all, but at our remote mountain cabin, I have
had success with annuals, Rhododendrums, impatiens, marigolds, and the
like.

I have never tried to grow roses, because I have always read that they are
very care-intensive, and hard to grow. Not living here fulltime, I just
have never thought I could provide the care such as spraying for insects,
etc.

My son recently bought a used cottage house in the mountains. In his back
yard there is a big clump of a rose bush that must be 25 years old or more.
I don't think it has been trimmed in many, many years. It has real long,
wild branches, some of which go off horizontally for 10-12 feet. He bought
the house in the fall, at which time the wild, lanky bushes had no roses on
them. I told him that if it were mine I would cut the entire maze back
until it was 4 or 5 feet off the ground. He didn't heed my advice.

Well today I saw this bush-maze again. It is literally covered all over
with beautiful roses, and it has dozens of more buds getting ready to
produce !!

My main point.... this monstrosity has had **no care** in many years. I
am as sure as I can be that it has not been trimmed in over 10 years, and
it has not been sprayed for insects, etc in at least several years, because
the house was unoccupied for that long.

So, what are the chances that I could plant some rose bushes at my cabin,
and that they would survive with little or no care ? I am here quite a bit
in the summer, but not from week to week.

I know there are many species, etc of roses, but what would be your guess as
to what kind of roses these are ? (They are mostly pink in color). Is
there such a thing as a wild rose bush ?

Any comments or advice would be appreciated !!

James


  #2   Report Post  
Old 24-05-2009, 11:34 PM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Apr 2009
Posts: 178
Default Rose Bushes ?

"James" no wrote in message
...
I am not much of a gardner at all, but at our remote mountain cabin, I
have had success with annuals, Rhododendrums, impatiens, marigolds, and
the like.

I have never tried to grow roses, because I have always read that they are
very care-intensive, and hard to grow. Not living here fulltime, I just
have never thought I could provide the care such as spraying for insects,
etc.

My son recently bought a used cottage house in the mountains. In his back
yard there is a big clump of a rose bush that must be 25 years old or
more. I don't think it has been trimmed in many, many years. It has
real long, wild branches, some of which go off horizontally for 10-12
feet. He bought the house in the fall, at which time the wild, lanky
bushes had no roses on them. I told him that if it were mine I would cut
the entire maze back until it was 4 or 5 feet off the ground. He didn't
heed my advice.

Well today I saw this bush-maze again. It is literally covered all over
with beautiful roses, and it has dozens of more buds getting ready to
produce !!

My main point.... this monstrosity has had **no care** in many years.
I am as sure as I can be that it has not been trimmed in over 10 years,
and it has not been sprayed for insects, etc in at least several years,
because the house was unoccupied for that long.

So, what are the chances that I could plant some rose bushes at my cabin,
and that they would survive with little or no care ? I am here quite a
bit in the summer, but not from week to week.

I know there are many species, etc of roses, but what would be your guess
as to what kind of roses these are ? (They are mostly pink in color).
Is there such a thing as a wild rose bush ?

Any comments or advice would be appreciated !!

James



When I moved into my home, there were three rose bushes with flower shapes
like these:

http://www.heirloomroses.com/cgi-bin...id+Tea+R oses

I was able to enjoy about six flowers from these bushes in a period of two
years because the deer keep munching on the new buds. And the bushes were
constantly fighting with some sort of disease. I remove the bushes last
year.

Last summer, I ran across a gorgeous planting of Rosa rugosa:

http://kolibrikerteszet.hu/files/Kep...a%20Rugosa.jpg

The leaves were perfect - not a spot on them. I asked the park worker if
they were sprayed. He said these plants got nothing but mulch and a smile.
He also said the deer tend to leave them alone. A month ago, I found a white
version at a local garden center. The owner confirmed that they're pretty
much trouble free in terms of disease & deer attacks. He pointed to a row of
them that have been growing alongside his driveway for several years, and
said that if snow plowing and road salt didn't kill them, nothing would,
short of a napalm attack.

Unless you must have the hybrid tea rose flower shape, I'd look for Rosa
rugosa for disease resistance. And the leaves are terrific. I believe what
keeps the deer away is the fact that the stems are prickly/thorny
*everywhere*, right up to the bottoms of the flowers. Planting the one I
bought was a real adventure.


  #3   Report Post  
Old 25-05-2009, 12:43 AM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,342
Default Rose Bushes ?


"JoeSpareBedroom" wrote in message
...
"James" no wrote in message
...
I am not much of a gardner at all, but at our remote mountain cabin, I
have had success with annuals, Rhododendrums, impatiens, marigolds, and
the like.

I have never tried to grow roses, because I have always read that they
are very care-intensive, and hard to grow. Not living here fulltime, I
just have never thought I could provide the care such as spraying for
insects, etc.

My son recently bought a used cottage house in the mountains. In his
back yard there is a big clump of a rose bush that must be 25 years old
or more. I don't think it has been trimmed in many, many years. It has
real long, wild branches, some of which go off horizontally for 10-12
feet. He bought the house in the fall, at which time the wild, lanky
bushes had no roses on them. I told him that if it were mine I would cut
the entire maze back until it was 4 or 5 feet off the ground. He
didn't heed my advice.

Well today I saw this bush-maze again. It is literally covered all over
with beautiful roses, and it has dozens of more buds getting ready to
produce !!

My main point.... this monstrosity has had **no care** in many years.
I am as sure as I can be that it has not been trimmed in over 10 years,
and it has not been sprayed for insects, etc in at least several years,
because the house was unoccupied for that long.

So, what are the chances that I could plant some rose bushes at my
cabin, and that they would survive with little or no care ? I am here
quite a bit in the summer, but not from week to week.

I know there are many species, etc of roses, but what would be your guess
as to what kind of roses these are ? (They are mostly pink in color).
Is there such a thing as a wild rose bush ?

Any comments or advice would be appreciated !!

James



When I moved into my home, there were three rose bushes with flower shapes
like these:

http://www.heirloomroses.com/cgi-bin...id+Tea+R oses

I was able to enjoy about six flowers from these bushes in a period of two
years because the deer keep munching on the new buds. And the bushes were
constantly fighting with some sort of disease. I remove the bushes last
year.

Last summer, I ran across a gorgeous planting of Rosa rugosa:

http://kolibrikerteszet.hu/files/Kep...a%20Rugosa.jpg

The leaves were perfect - not a spot on them. I asked the park worker if
they were sprayed. He said these plants got nothing but mulch and a smile.
He also said the deer tend to leave them alone. A month ago, I found a
white version at a local garden center. The owner confirmed that they're
pretty much trouble free in terms of disease & deer attacks. He pointed to
a row of them that have been growing alongside his driveway for several
years, and said that if snow plowing and road salt didn't kill them,
nothing would, short of a napalm attack.

Unless you must have the hybrid tea rose flower shape, I'd look for Rosa
rugosa for disease resistance. And the leaves are terrific. I believe what
keeps the deer away is the fact that the stems are prickly/thorny
*everywhere*, right up to the bottoms of the flowers. Planting the one I
bought was a real adventure.

I have about a dozen rosa rugusa stands on my property. Nothing seems to
bother them, nothing eats them, they are much too thorny. They flower all
summer but they are not the type of flower you'd want for cut roses,
certainly not with those deadly stems, nor do they last very long once cut,
maybe 24 hours at best before all the petals have dropped. Rosa rugusa is
excellent protection for wildlife, many song birds and small critters make
their homes among these thorny bushes... but I would not recommend planting
them in the typical rose garden, you don't want to mess with them without
significant protection (think ballistics cloth). One word of caution I'll
offer, if you decide to prune them be sure to glove up and don your best
armor and protect your face, and do not leave any cuttings no matter how
small lying about for later, the drier they become the more deadly... their
thorns will penetrate the soles of the best hunting boot, you've been
warned. I don't recommend planting rosa rugosa unless you have some serios
acrerage and then only at like the edges of a forest, not under any
circumstances in a garden you intend to cultivate. I have some along side
areas where I mow, once a season I get dressed in my fire hose cloth
garments and go at them with a 20" machete, then I make like fifty passes
over the cuttings with my mulching mower until the thorny twigs are like
pesto. Rosa rugosa is not for your typical surburban yard.



  #4   Report Post  
Old 25-05-2009, 04:36 AM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Apr 2009
Posts: 178
Default Rose Bushes ?

"brooklyn1" wrote in message
...

Rosa rugosa is not for your typical surburban yard.



Bullshit.


  #5   Report Post  
Old 25-05-2009, 04:37 AM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,358
Default Rose Bushes ?

"James" no wrote in message

I have never tried to grow roses, because I have always read that they are
very care-intensive, and hard to grow.


Some roses are care intensive, others are as tough as old boots and will
survive with no care for decades in abandoned cottages in just the way you
have described.


My son recently bought a used cottage house in the mountains. In his back
yard there is a big clump of a rose bush that must be 25 years old or
more. I don't think it has been trimmed in many, many years. It has
real long, wild branches, some of which go off horizontally for 10-12
feet. He bought the house in the fall, at which time the wild, lanky
bushes had no roses on them. I told him that if it were mine I would cut
the entire maze back until it was 4 or 5 feet off the ground. He didn't
heed my advice.


And in the case of some types of roses, that advice you gave would have been
very wrong.

Well today I saw this bush-maze again. It is literally covered all over
with beautiful roses, and it has dozens of more buds getting ready to
produce !!

My main point.... this monstrosity has had **no care** in many years.
I am as sure as I can be that it has not been trimmed in over 10 years,
and it has not been sprayed for insects, etc in at least several years,
because the house was unoccupied for that long.

So, what are the chances that I could plant some rose bushes at my cabin,
and that they would survive with little or no care ? I am here quite a
bit in the summer, but not from week to week.

I know there are many species, etc of roses, but what would be your guess
as to what kind of roses these are ? (They are mostly pink in color).
Is there such a thing as a wild rose bush ?


I presume you are in the USA? If you are, than I have no idea what this
rose could be, but if you are in Australia there is a fair chance that it
would be "Dorothy Perkins". I have read that the US has one of the wild
roses called "Cherokee Rose" that is almost as feral as "Dorothy" is in Oz,
but since I've never seen one or know what it looks like, I can't say if it
could be that or not.

You've asked a question along the lines of 'how long is a piece of string'
so it's hard to give you an answer, so I would recommend that you head off
to a library and find a book called "Roses" by Roger Phillips and Martin
Rix. That book will tell you all you need to know to pick the sort of roses
that I'm now going to write about (and you can see plenty of pics so you
know about the form of the bush and the flower).

Avoid any really 'modern' roses, so don't try any of the newer hybrid tea
roses or you'll end up disappointed as these are the high care group.

Having said that, there are many early (19th century) hybrids that also may
serve your purpose but local knowledge of your situation would be needed to
say which might work.

Basically you should be looking for what is called 'species' roses and this
includes the rugosas. As others have said, the rugosas are gorgeous and
tough but they aren't the only ones that need little care.

I love the little old pimpinella roses (they are called Burnet roses) but
they are generaly small roses. Some of these have been hydridised and (I
think) they might suit.

As a start, you might like to read this as it gives some idea of the
hugeness of your question but it gives you and idea of the type of roses you
should be looking at if you don't want high maintenance roses:
http://www.botanical.com/botanical/m...es-18.html#bur




  #6   Report Post  
Old 25-05-2009, 02:42 PM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Aug 2008
Posts: 413
Default Rose Bushes ?

On Sun, 24 May 2009 15:49:58 -0400, "James" no
wrote:

I am not much of a gardner at all, but at our remote mountain cabin, I have
had success with annuals, Rhododendrums, impatiens, marigolds, and the
like.

I have never tried to grow roses, because I have always read that they are
very care-intensive, and hard to grow. Not living here fulltime, I just
have never thought I could provide the care such as spraying for insects,
etc.

My son recently bought a used cottage house in the mountains. In his back
yard there is a big clump of a rose bush that must be 25 years old or more.
I don't think it has been trimmed in many, many years. It has real long,
wild branches, some of which go off horizontally for 10-12 feet. He bought
the house in the fall, at which time the wild, lanky bushes had no roses on
them. I told him that if it were mine I would cut the entire maze back
until it was 4 or 5 feet off the ground. He didn't heed my advice.

Well today I saw this bush-maze again. It is literally covered all over
with beautiful roses, and it has dozens of more buds getting ready to
produce !!

My main point.... this monstrosity has had **no care** in many years. I
am as sure as I can be that it has not been trimmed in over 10 years, and
it has not been sprayed for insects, etc in at least several years, because
the house was unoccupied for that long.

So, what are the chances that I could plant some rose bushes at my cabin,
and that they would survive with little or no care ? I am here quite a bit
in the summer, but not from week to week.

I know there are many species, etc of roses, but what would be your guess as
to what kind of roses these are ? (They are mostly pink in color). Is
there such a thing as a wild rose bush ?

Any comments or advice would be appreciated !!

James



To look their best roses require regular maintenance. I love roses,
but only have three and that is enough work for me. I had wild rose
bushes but removed them--they may look okay in a natural unkept
garden.
  #7   Report Post  
Old 25-05-2009, 05:50 PM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,342
Default Rose Bushes ?

"Phisherman" wrote:

To look their best roses require regular maintenance. I love roses,
but only have three and that is enough work for me.


I feel the same, roses are a lot of work, I have only one hybridized rose,
it was here when I moved in, and even that one requires constant care...
every sap sucking insect on the planet seems to find it and it's a favorite
of Japanese beetles. At my last house I had planted a dozen rose bushes
before I knew how much work they were... over the twenty years I was there I
gave them all away, I used to beg visiters to take them.

I had wild rose
bushes but removed them--they may look okay in a natural unkept
garden.


Exactly, I would not recommend wild rosa rugosa for the typical surburban
lot sized garden unless one has the space and/or doesn't mind their unkempt
habit... they are also very dangerous if one has young kids scampering
about, even old kids running into that thorny bush can end up in the ER for
a protracted stay, I think it's far worse than barbed wire. If you fall
into one you'd likely need to lie there in excruciating pain and keep still,
and hope someone comes by with a jaws of life pruning tool to get you out.

I realize now that I have more wild rosa rugosa growing here than I at first
realized... I can see three huge ones from my widow, each like 15' tall and
as wide, in the hedgerow between my property and my neighbor... I have
another lower growing one by my creek out front but I need to go outside to
see it, and there are quite a few more scattered about at the edges of the
wooded areas. Every year I have to hack those back where I mow with a
machete or I wouldn't be able to mow a straight line, they grow fast and jut
out, they'd rip me up if I mowed too near. I keep telling myself that I
should get out there with a shovel and pick axe to remove them, but they
make wonderful wildlife cover so they win out. I don't think their flowers
are very rose like, they have few petals (just one skimpy row) and they
don't last more than a day on the plant.. And unless the plant is left
unpruned it won't flower very much at all... the parts I cut back don't
flower until the following year, and they only flower on the very upper
parts, so unless you're willing to let them have their full growth they
won't flower, all you'll have is a bush of deadly thorns. Many of the
hybridized roses are grafted to wild rosa ragosa root stock, so it's
important to remove those suckers before the entire plant resorts back to
wild. Wild rosa rugosa is one of the plants typically suggested in the mix
for wildlife habitant reclaimation programs... it's really not something one
wants as specimen plant. Oh, and yellow jackets love to make their nest in
the ground under a wild rosa rugosa, not a good mix in ones backyard.


  #8   Report Post  
Old 25-05-2009, 09:28 PM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Jun 2007
Posts: 21
Default Rose Bushes ?

Thank you, FarmI for the good info !!!

James


  #9   Report Post  
Old 26-05-2009, 04:27 AM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,358
Default Rose Bushes ?

"James" no wrote in message

Thank you, FarmI for the good info !!!


I hope I've been of some small assistance.

You asked a question about a group of plants that has always fascinated me
for their beauty, their history and the fact that as you've found in the
case of your son's rose, can survive and thrive even with no care.

After posting I thought of many other things I should have written so I did
a Net hunt and found some sites that may help you in your quest -some of
these sites are in Oz, some in the US, but it may help you with the terms
used when asking about old roses so the sites may help you find a source for
the sort of roses you need.

The US will have rosarian societies who will have worked hard to save old
varieties and keep them in cultivation. Sadly most nurseries don't stock
these plants and an active hunt from specialist suppliers is needed to find
them but I'm sure that these US suppliers are like those I know of in Oz and
will ship them to you bare rooted at the right time of the year. Sadly many
people don't know about the range of roses and when they hear the word
'rose', they only see in their mind's eye a 'rose' that looks like a hybrid
tea. They are missing out on such a rich field of flower types.

It also occurred to me that, as in Oz, famous old houses like Jefferson's
'Monticello' would have heritage garden plants growing and looking at what
is in similar old US gardens would be a good source of info on these old
plants.

David Austin who is an English rose breeder has produced roses which are
described as being 'old'. Don't buy them for the situation you described as
they need more care than you would want to give them. You could take a
cutting off your roses rose though and that is an easy way of reproducing
his gorgeous rose.

Anyway, here's the cites (BTW are you also known as 'Jim" and post under
another addy in another newsgroup I infest?)
http://www.rkdn.org/roses/
http://www.antiqueroses.com/public/a.../rose_care.htm
http://www.monticello.org/chp/leonie_bell.html
http://www.abc.net.au/gardening/stories/s1866654.htm
http://www.abc.net.au/gardening/stories/s2163640.htm

Enjoy! It's a fascinating area, but be warned, old roses can become
addictive.




  #10   Report Post  
Old 26-05-2009, 04:30 AM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,358
Default Rose Bushes ?

"brooklyn1" wrote in message
"Phisherman" wrote:

To look their best roses require regular maintenance. I love roses,
but only have three and that is enough work for me.


I feel the same, roses are a lot of work,


If you think that, then you don't know about the whole range of roses that
are available. Many roses need no care at all.

It is the roses that need no care that this thread is about.




  #11   Report Post  
Old 26-05-2009, 02:57 PM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,342
Default Rose Bushes ?


"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message
...
"brooklyn1" wrote in message
"Phisherman" wrote:

To look their best roses require regular maintenance. I love roses,
but only have three and that is enough work for me.


I feel the same, roses are a lot of work,


If you think that, then you don't know about the whole range of roses that
are available. Many roses need no care at all.

It is the roses that need no care that this thread is about.


That's right... wild roses are the only roses that need no care, instead
they need beware. Um, we were doing just fine, you're the one who
introduced the fancy schmacy roses into this thread, so go sit on a thorn
while you repent..


  #12   Report Post  
Old 26-05-2009, 07:36 PM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Aug 2007
Posts: 668
Default Rose Bushes ?

"brooklyn1" wrote in
:

"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message


It is the roses that need no care that this thread is about.


That's right... wild roses are the only roses that need no care,
instead they need beware. Um, we were doing just fine, you're
the one who introduced the fancy schmacy roses into this thread,
so go sit on a thorn while you repent..


that's not true. there are many antique roses that thrive without
being fussed over... the rugosas are just *one* type of antique rose.
from your discription the roses in your field that you are whining
about aren't rugosas anyway. rugosas have a lot of short thorns, not
huge tearing daggers. they're probably multifloras.
i wouldn't call the old roses fancy schamcy. they're sturdy, disease
resistant, grow on their own roots, & can survive just fine in cold
winter areas (most old roses are hardy to zone 5, but several types
are hardy to zone 3). fancy roses are the hybrid teas that die if you
look at them wrong & have no fragrance anyway, but the florist trade
loves them.
lee
  #13   Report Post  
Old 26-05-2009, 07:52 PM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Apr 2009
Posts: 178
Default Rose Bushes ?

"enigma" wrote in message
...
"brooklyn1" wrote in
:

"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message


It is the roses that need no care that this thread is about.


That's right... wild roses are the only roses that need no care,
instead they need beware. Um, we were doing just fine, you're
the one who introduced the fancy schmacy roses into this thread,
so go sit on a thorn while you repent..


that's not true. there are many antique roses that thrive without
being fussed over... the rugosas are just *one* type of antique rose.
from your discription the roses in your field that you are whining
about aren't rugosas anyway. rugosas have a lot of short thorns, not
huge tearing daggers. they're probably multifloras.
i wouldn't call the old roses fancy schamcy. they're sturdy, disease
resistant, grow on their own roots, & can survive just fine in cold
winter areas (most old roses are hardy to zone 5, but several types
are hardy to zone 3). fancy roses are the hybrid teas that die if you
look at them wrong & have no fragrance anyway, but the florist trade
loves them.
lee



How dare you question Sheldon!?!? What nerve.


  #14   Report Post  
Old 26-05-2009, 08:17 PM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: May 2009
Posts: 1,085
Default Rose Bushes ?

In article ,
enigma wrote:

"brooklyn1" wrote in
:

"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message


It is the roses that need no care that this thread is about.


That's right... wild roses are the only roses that need no care,
instead they need beware. Um, we were doing just fine, you're
the one who introduced the fancy schmacy roses into this thread,
so go sit on a thorn while you repent..


that's not true. there are many antique roses that thrive without
being fussed over... the rugosas are just *one* type of antique rose.
from your discription the roses in your field that you are whining
about aren't rugosas anyway. rugosas have a lot of short thorns, not
huge tearing daggers. they're probably multifloras.
i wouldn't call the old roses fancy schamcy. they're sturdy, disease
resistant, grow on their own roots, & can survive just fine in cold
winter areas (most old roses are hardy to zone 5, but several types
are hardy to zone 3). fancy roses are the hybrid teas that die if you
look at them wrong & have no fragrance anyway, but the florist trade
loves them.
lee


We have a few David Austin Roses that handle shade and neglect.

http://www.davidaustinroses.com/american/Advanced.asp

Bill who places corn meal about when I think of it for black spot.

--
Garden in shade zone 5 S Jersey USA

Not all who wander are lost.
- J.R.R. Tolkien (1892-1973)







  #15   Report Post  
Old 27-05-2009, 01:42 AM posted to rec.gardens
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity by GardenBanter: Feb 2007
Posts: 2,358
Default Rose Bushes ?

"brooklyn1" wrote in message
"FarmI" ask@itshall be given wrote in message
"brooklyn1" wrote in message
"Phisherman" wrote:

To look their best roses require regular maintenance. I love roses,
but only have three and that is enough work for me.

I feel the same, roses are a lot of work,


If you think that, then you don't know about the whole range of roses
that are available. Many roses need no care at all.

It is the roses that need no care that this thread is about.


That's right... wild roses are the only roses that need no care, instead
they need beware. Um, we were doing just fine, you're the one who
introduced the fancy schmacy roses into this thread, so go sit on a thorn
while you repent..


Sheldon, you're an idiot and it's been established by now that you have the
brains of a jellyfish.

If you knew anything at all on the subject, you wouldn't write such stupid
things.


Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
If you could only plant three rose bushes... satujinn Roses 11 30-03-2011 07:01 PM
An interesting observation on rose bushes Ashley Plant Science 6 10-11-2003 01:44 AM
Help please on pruning old rose bushes Judy Donovan United Kingdom 9 10-08-2003 02:03 AM
rose bushes next to house ~consul Gardening 5 20-06-2003 12:20 AM
Rose bushes at Home Depot Mceezee Gardening 7 15-05-2003 03:56 AM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 09:50 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 GardenBanter.co.uk.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Gardening"

 

Copyright © 2017