Xref: news7 rec.gardens.roses:89732


I know hybrid teas and many other roses can not be propagated successfully
from cuttings, but is it possible to use cuttings from climbing roses for
propagating?

I want to cover a long stretch of fence with climbing roses and would like
to keep the expense down as much as possible.

Shepherd

shepherd mentioned:

I know hybrid teas and many other roses can not be propagated successfully
from cuttings,

Where in the world did you get that crazy idea?

You can propagate the vast majority of roses of whatever kind from
cuttings. Some are easier than others and a few are downright finiky,
but they are very few.

Finiky.... I like that word...

but is it possible to use cuttings from climbing roses for
propagating?

Yowza. Be forewarned though that it is going to take you 2 years to
catch up to the plant size you can buy in the store today.

Because of the time and effort involved, I myself limit propagating of
cuttings to varieties that you can't get elsewhere. The cuttings I am
looking to start this year a

Maestro
Cimarosa
Peppermint Swirl
My Choice and
Quaker Star

Can't find these anywhere, so I am going to politely ask for cuttings
from the San Jose Heritage Rose Garden when I visit there at the end
of April.

Bob Bauer
Moving 20 roses (some HUGE) and giving away 12 more in the next 3
days. This is too much like work! heh heh

Bob Bauer wrote in
:

shepherd mentioned:

but is it possible to use cuttings from climbing roses for
propagating?

Yowza. Be forewarned though that it is going to take you 2 years to
catch up to the plant size you can buy in the store today.

Largely true, though I think the original poster mentioned that he wanted
to cover a fence with climbers for the least cost. If he has a couple years
to wait for full effect, this might be the way to go. The one climber I
took cuttings of last year, Purezza, rooted well and after nine months both
plants are in 5-gallon containers and have just begun blooming this month.
I have one ready to train up a pillar.

And now I know why it's called 'Purezza'...the buds really do look just
like pearls.

----

Bob Bauer wrote:

shepherd mentioned:

I know hybrid teas and many other roses can not be propagated successfully
from cuttings,

This isn't quite true. HT's *can* be propagatged from cuttings. You
might have gotten the wrong impression from reading those of us whining
about the roses that won't strike from softwood cuttings, those of us
who whine about divas that won't grow roots, or those of us who tried
to root florists roses from Ecudor and Columbia and had no luck.

You can propagate the vast majority of roses of whatever kind from
cuttings. Some are easier than others and a few are downright finiky,
but they are very few.

True to the core. Technique becomes important with some roses,
equipment is essential with certain roses, timing is important with all
roses. You can read about different techniques using softwood and
hardwood cuttings at the unhappily named American Rose Society page:

http://www.ars.org/dynaweb/1001124/e...000&W=C&P=N&S=
1001124&U=1&SS=1&&ver=0

Here's another:
http://www.texas-rose-rustlers.com/propagat.htm

but is it possible to use cuttings from climbing roses for
propagating?

Absolutely.

Because of the time and effort involved, I myself limit propagating of
cuttings to varieties that you can't get elsewhere.

I propagate roses I really like and want to share. I have given away
Sally Holmes to a number of guests who came to our home and admired my
plants. One even took two. I propagate old roses I've run into where
the plants to be particularly rare or beautiful. And I propagate roses
that I want more of for my own garden experiments.

This year I took hardwood cuttings for the first time, stuck them in
the fallow vegetable garden, and have watched them start growing. At
least three are varieties that I have never been able to start from
softwood cuttings have at least shown new growth.

Why do you refer to your reference as the "unhappily named American Rose
Society page"?

The ARS may be a stodgy group of old folks, however it
does more to promote Roses than any organization in the
US.

Tim Tompkins
Life Member of ARS



"Cass" wrote in message
...
Bob Bauer wrote:

shepherd mentioned:

I know hybrid teas and many other roses can not be propagated
successfully
from cuttings,

This isn't quite true. HT's *can* be propagatged from cuttings. You
might have gotten the wrong impression from reading those of us whining
about the roses that won't strike from softwood cuttings, those of us
who whine about divas that won't grow roots, or those of us who tried
to root florists roses from Ecudor and Columbia and had no luck.

You can propagate the vast majority of roses of whatever kind from
cuttings. Some are easier than others and a few are downright finiky,
but they are very few.

True to the core. Technique becomes important with some roses,
equipment is essential with certain roses, timing is important with all
roses. You can read about different techniques using softwood and
hardwood cuttings at the unhappily named American Rose Society page:

http://www.ars.org/dynaweb/1001124/e...000&W=C&P=N&S=
1001124&U=1&SS=1&&ver=0

Here's another:
http://www.texas-rose-rustlers.com/propagat.htm

but is it possible to use cuttings from climbing roses for
propagating?

Absolutely.

Because of the time and effort involved, I myself limit propagating of
cuttings to varieties that you can't get elsewhere.

I propagate roses I really like and want to share. I have given away
Sally Holmes to a number of guests who came to our home and admired my
plants. One even took two. I propagate old roses I've run into where
the plants to be particularly rare or beautiful. And I propagate roses
that I want more of for my own garden experiments.

This year I took hardwood cuttings for the first time, stuck them in
the fallow vegetable garden, and have watched them start growing. At
least three are varieties that I have never been able to start from
softwood cuttings have at least shown new growth.

"Tim Tompkins" wrote in message
...
Why do you refer to your reference as the "unhappily named American Rose
Society page"?

The ARS may be a stodgy group of old folks, however it
does more to promote Roses than any organization in the
US.

Tim Tompkins
Life Member of ARS

Hello Tim,

A look at this group of enablers will tell you that we promote
all sorts of roses, not only the bench favorites. Could that be the
reason why Cass is calling it "the unhappily named"? When
I did belong to the society -a million years ago- indeed the
only thing anyone was interested in speaking about in those
days was about exhibitions and how to pin/cover the blossoms
before "the" day. And there was little old me, wanting to
learn more about the old garden roses that held my heart and
curiosity when I knew little about them. I don't know if this
is still the issue, but it was enough for me to go back to read
Gertrude Jekyll, Nancy Stern, S. Reynolds Hole and the rest
of the old fogies like me, to learn about what I always considered
to be an important part of growing roses. All inclusive.
I went to 4 meetings, that was enough to last me for a lifetime.

I see the endorsement of the ARS in some roses that shouldn't
be fed to pigs, leave aside sold to consumers who know as
close to nothing about growing as the people who are selling
them. At one of the local Home Despot (our pet name for them)
BH and I nearly died when we saw a window box made of
cedar, all of perhaps 30-inch in length by at best 10-inch height
displaying 3 roses in it. I wish I would have had my camera
with me. The bags underneath proudly displayed the endorsement
of the ARS.

Endorsing or promoting something for either money or recognition
carries a hefty price in credibility. And that appears the price the
ARS is paying for endorsements such as this.
This is not an organization that truly educates, as any society that
promotes itself as such should do. When there is a narrow view
of what one should do, it becomes anything but all inclusive.
In that case it becomes a social club. I, for one, like Groucho Marx
wouldn't belong to a club that would have me as a member.

If I were a member the first thing I would do is to demand that
the endorsement be taken out of the bags, instead of promoting
roses I would promote education about how to grow them, and
then I will spend my time not pursuing a ribbon that belongs to
Mother Nature but volunteering to take care of the Municipal
gardens that struggle to maintain what they have ( The Portland
Test Garden in Washington Park has only one paid employee).

So as you see, in my case I agree with Cass; it is unhappily named
ARS. It would be better to rename it the Rose Exhibitor's Society
of America. I have no problem with that, and I think that it would
be closer to the truth as perceived by those of us that have no
inclination to enter into a competition to get a ribbon earned solely
by the cultivation practices we exercise. The rose was originally
created by Mother Nature, the marriage was conducted by the
Hybridizer and all I would have to do is to feed the rose, and
try to have a healthy, beautiful plant. That should be the goal
of every rosarian, sans ribbons attached.

Allegra

I understand you view based upon your experience.

I also had the same opinion of the ARS and many local
societies in my early days of growing roses. Many of the local societies
began in the post WWII days when many garden clubs were founded. With the
suburbs and leisure time gardening became a past time for the people of my
parents generation. Hybrid Teas were the roses to have and for the general
public, HT's are the only roses they know.

My experience in Colorado, particularly the Denver Rose
Society has opened a new view and opinion of the ARS and its local
affiliates. True, there are a number of older members who focus only on the
HT's, we also have a number of people who are very enthusastic about the
alternates: OGR's, 'heritage roses', English Roses, miniatures, landscaping
roses, Canadians .....

Although the ARS is a non-profit organization, it still requires a solid
finincial footing and much of that must come from the comercial aspects of
rose culture. Nothing comes for free and any healthy organization must find
the finincial sources to maintain its existance.

Within the ARS are many small groups that promote the less popular classes
of roses. As HT's have been over
hybridized and lost many desirable characteristics to the
'perfect bloom' there is a very strong trend to rethink the whole.

Comercial growers and hybridizers are a business and they must produce a
product that has commercial appeal and provide the necessary sales to
sustain them. The buyers of roses for most garden centers know very little
about roses, they purchase what they know has sold for them in the past.
Often they are very receptive to input from customers, particularly those
how can demonstrate a solid knowledge of rose culture. Most of the garden
centers along the Colorado front range work with the local ARS affiliate
societies and are offering a wide selection of rose species.

Instead of criticizing the 'despots', see if they will work with you to
expand the public awareness of the wide world of roses.

Tim
"Allegra" wrote in message
news:eqBca.109540$qi4.57281@rwcrnsc54...

"Tim Tompkins" wrote in message
...
Why do you refer to your reference as the "unhappily named American
Rose
Society page"?

The ARS may be a stodgy group of old folks, however it
does more to promote Roses than any organization in the
US.

Tim Tompkins
Life Member of ARS

Hello Tim,

A look at this group of enablers will tell you that we promote
all sorts of roses, not only the bench favorites. Could that be the
reason why Cass is calling it "the unhappily named"? When
I did belong to the society -a million years ago- indeed the
only thing anyone was interested in speaking about in those
days was about exhibitions and how to pin/cover the blossoms
before "the" day. And there was little old me, wanting to
learn more about the old garden roses that held my heart and
curiosity when I knew little about them. I don't know if this
is still the issue, but it was enough for me to go back to read
Gertrude Jekyll, Nancy Stern, S. Reynolds Hole and the rest
of the old fogies like me, to learn about what I always considered
to be an important part of growing roses. All inclusive.
I went to 4 meetings, that was enough to last me for a lifetime.

I see the endorsement of the ARS in some roses that shouldn't
be fed to pigs, leave aside sold to consumers who know as
close to nothing about growing as the people who are selling
them. At one of the local Home Despot (our pet name for them)
BH and I nearly died when we saw a window box made of
cedar, all of perhaps 30-inch in length by at best 10-inch height
displaying 3 roses in it. I wish I would have had my camera
with me. The bags underneath proudly displayed the endorsement
of the ARS.

Endorsing or promoting something for either money or recognition
carries a hefty price in credibility. And that appears the price the
ARS is paying for endorsements such as this.
This is not an organization that truly educates, as any society that
promotes itself as such should do. When there is a narrow view
of what one should do, it becomes anything but all inclusive.
In that case it becomes a social club. I, for one, like Groucho Marx
wouldn't belong to a club that would have me as a member.

If I were a member the first thing I would do is to demand that
the endorsement be taken out of the bags, instead of promoting
roses I would promote education about how to grow them, and
then I will spend my time not pursuing a ribbon that belongs to
Mother Nature but volunteering to take care of the Municipal
gardens that struggle to maintain what they have ( The Portland
Test Garden in Washington Park has only one paid employee).

So as you see, in my case I agree with Cass; it is unhappily named
ARS. It would be better to rename it the Rose Exhibitor's Society
of America. I have no problem with that, and I think that it would
be closer to the truth as perceived by those of us that have no
inclination to enter into a competition to get a ribbon earned solely
by the cultivation practices we exercise. The rose was originally
created by Mother Nature, the marriage was conducted by the
Hybridizer and all I would have to do is to feed the rose, and
try to have a healthy, beautiful plant. That should be the goal
of every rosarian, sans ribbons attached.

Allegra

"Tim Tompkins" wrote in message

Instead of criticizing the 'despots', see if they will work with you to
expand the public awareness of the wide world of roses.

Tim

I do have very solid reasons to criticize the Despots.
At least the one in Tigard, Oregon.

Last year I was there picking up some river rock
and all of the roses offered were in such state
of abandonment that I actually spoke to the assistant
manager and offered to come and work for free to
take care of the ones that were in such a distress.

My husband was with me and he was appalled at
the sight of RMV in just about every rose, dried
and broken canes, roses stuffed in one gallon pots
that were dried and the soil separating from the
walls of the pot. Plants are living things, he made
a comment that if those were animals instead of
roses the place would have been closed by then
accused of cruel and unusual punishment.
I am not the one endorsing those roses, the ARS is.

And although I left my phone number, and tried
several times to get in touch with the manager to
speak about this issue, I was told he would call
me back and never did. I finally gave up. I don't
buy my roses at the Despot and I can only feel
sorry for those who based on that endorsement,
may do so.

Allegra

In article , Tim Tompkins
wrote:

Why do you refer to your reference as the "unhappily named American Rose
Society page"?

The ARS may be a stodgy group of old folks, however it
does more to promote Roses than any organization in the
US.

Tim Tompkins
Life Member of ARS

Oh, Tim, you misunderstand me. URL's on the internet work best when
they are shorter than one line long. When the ARS redesigned its
website, they went to a system that makes finding the web addresses
within the site a bit of a challenge. They also have addresses that are
4 lines long. It is those 4 line addresses that I find to be "unhappily
named."

I belong to the ARS, and while I disagree with some of what it does, I
think the information is pretty good. I never said it's a stodgy group
of old folks, but then who am I to argue with a life member. ;-P

--
-=-
Cass
Zone 9 San Francisco Bay Area
http://home.attbi.com/~cassbernstein/index.html