This is the kind of thing that drives me crazy about the ARS! They print articles frequently that make sweeping statements about "roses", when what they really mean are "hybrid teas". They do this about spraying, pruning, etc. In my opinion this sort of article just promotes the old canard that roses are hard to grow, hard to take care of, and will take up at least 50% of your free time if you do it correctly! Of course, this discourages even people who garden from trying roses - which is presumably NOT what the ARS wants to do.

They have, of course, been printing other sorts of articles in the past few years, but the "old school" ones still predominate. All they need is a little editing...that article might have said : "In my opinion hybrid tea roses in such and such areas which are prone to blackspot may need a spraying routine, OR YOU CAN GROW ROSES THAT ARE NOT PRONE TO BLACKSPOT which grow in that climate such as ...........". How hard is that?

Sorry to rant on & on, but for an organization that says it is trying to get more people to grow more roses, I think the ARS works against itself each time it publishes an article that says you must obey all sorts of arbitrary rules in order to grow roses that are not suited to your climate, and others that are not suited to ANY climate. Instead they should encourage folks to find out which kinds will grow happily where the gardener lives, without massive amounts of poison and onerous time consuming work.

I have found that it is actually fun to do the research to find out which kinds of roses thrive in your climate. It was interesting to me when I realized that tea roses love my CA Mediterranean climate, but I cannot grow some of the lovely old European antique roses, because of a lack of enough winter chill. From reading the ARS magazine, I rarely get insights like this. They seem to pretend that all roses can be grown anywhere, as long as you OBEY ALL OF THE RULES! This, of course, is not true, and must add to the numbers of would be rose growers who give up because of unnecessary failures.

End of rant. Going out in the garden. Our Spring is just starting, my banksie lutea blossoms are about 10% out, the teas and hybrid giganticas are covered with buds, as are the hybrid musks. I never spray any of them, by the way, although my 100+ roses do not compare with your 1,000! Happy Spring!

Jackie

Some vendors that sell roses also have that written in there instruction sheets.
Yes, I also think it sends a negative message for the ARS site or anyone to word it that way.

OK, all you who critize the ARS website. If you are not pleased with the content, change it. Simply write an updated article, based on facts, and submit it to the webmaster for consideration. Complaining here will change nothing but it will cause many to think less of the ARS.
Don't write to "Ask Questions about roses". They come directly to me and I can do nothing about the website content.
They will respond though. When I volunteered on the new site they asked me how I wanted to handle it. When I requested a direct link to my e-mail, it was up the next day.

karl_bapst_rosenut, your advice sounds "logical". I will not speak about the experience of others who tried. But, those who have been long term members of this and earlier Internet forum type groups should be familiar with what was tried and what was accomplished.

Personally, I was one of the founding members of the first ARS web site. I have an article about it in the Annual somewhere around 1996 or 97. Please read that article and compare what I "expected" with what developed.

I was also on the national historical committee. We were trying to get the early Annuals on CD/DVD. Thank you Google for accomplishing what we were not able to do.

Congratulations on your web appointment. I also had a web position similar to what you now have but it was limited to scientific information. It is interesting that you feel that you can do nothing about web content, yet you will answer "question about roses". Will you be limited to information that does not contradict the written information? I think that you should try to get all of the information "on the same page" i.e. so that each part is consistent.

Thanks for those comments, Karl. I'm always perplexed by the fact that ARS is the group that many rosarians love to hate. Intuitively, we all know that it's impossible to be all things to all people . . . I'm just grateful that there is a national organization with a focus exclusively on roses.

Henry
This is not the forum to further discuss or debate our contributions to the ARS website.
Question regarding the website that do come to me are forwarded to the web master or ARS headquarters for their response and action. My replies are based on my current knowledge of roses plus information I can authenticate. Anything out of my expertise is forwarded to experts in that field or growing zone.
Aside from the above, I'll not start a flaming war with you unless you wish to e-mail me privately off the forum.
As always my e-mail is part of my post.
Karl

What disturbs me is that a large, nationally prominent organization in this day and age should condone and indeed recommend spraying. It's discouraging and the blindness of this stance, given everything we now know about the effect of toxins on the environment, frightens and angers me.

Ingrid

karl_bapst_rosenut, you made a suggestion on an open website. I decided to discuss on the open website your posted suggestion using my actual experience when trying what I feel you are suggesting.

Good luck in your new position.

Fundamentally I see this thread as an old argument being revisited yet once again. We know that there are two primary factions in rosenculture: there are those of us that don't believe in spraying and those that don't believe in rose gardening without it.

Honestly I'm a member of the later and although I understand the points presented by team no-spray, I know from experience that I can't grow the big award winning florist formed roses that I drool over on this forum and HMF without a spray regimen. Furthermore, when neighbors stop by my house and ask how I do it I always say that part of the answer comes from Fortuniana rootstock in Florida soil and the other part of the answer comes from having some kind of spray regimen.

I can see how the ARS would pose such a statement because without spraying so many of the roses that attract people like me to roses are ungrowable. Are there repercussions? Sure, but what they do out in the fields has a much larger impact than what I do in my 70X120' plot of land. Is it wrong? I don't think it is anymore than saying that I'm wrong for wanting to grow big beautiful Hybrid Teas and Grandifloras. I think the ARS understands that most people are interested in growing showy roses and until there are more resilient showy roses out there (and KO taught me that there is yet to be an impervious rose as I learned when mine got powdery mildew and was attacked by thrips) there will be a need for spray programs.

No need to be angry or upset or let it ruin your day.
The world will keep turning. Relax ;-)

Does the National ARS article apply to the parts of the U.S. that have dry climates? For example, the last time I looked Arizonia was part of the U.S. This is what the Arizonia Extension Plant Pathology department stated on February 10, 2010.

http://ag.arizona.edu/PLP/plpext/diseases/trees/rose/roseblkspt.html

"Black spot is rarely problematic in Arizona because of our dry climate, but occurs in late summer in areas with substantial summer rains such as Cochise County."

AND

" Cultural methods of control may be all that is needed in most cases: avoid planting in shady areas, use overhead watering only in the morning so plants will dry quickly, remove fallen leaves and dispose of them in the garbage, and prune plants so there is good air circulation in the canopy."

Here is a link that might be useful: Arizonia Extension Plant Pathology link

Ingrid
The official stance of the ARS is to practice Integrated Pest Management (IPM)
They know most amateur rose growers don't want to see any insect or disease damage on their roses. I'm often critized by visitors to my garden when they see insect damage or a little blackspot. I often change their minds when I explain I use no pesticides and explain why.
If they still want perfect exhibition quality roses I give them the least toxic way to achieve that. I do the same when I reply to questions online. Many articles in the ARS magazine and on their website are written by exhibitors who still spray for insect and disease control to get those perfect trophy blooms. Perhaps if enough of us write to the website they'll add more organic pest control information?

"Perhaps if enough of us write to the website they'll add more organic pest control information?"

Sounds like a good plan to me.

I feel the ARS is changing in a positive way. There are more articles about OGR and the content is more varied as to the type of roses we may all be interested in lately. I agree that some things could be presented "better", but it won't happen unless we contact them about it.

I find they do listen, and they seem to be trying very hard.

Sandy

Well if we continue to do our jobs as breeders then this requirement will no longer be true. I really enjoy the work that Buck and Radler have done in this area.

Face it, the AARS typically suck as far as disease performance (I know there are exceptions)- and that's what generally is bought by newby rosarians and then they become discouraged against roses because they can't grow them.

"Perhaps if enough of us write to the website they'll add more organic pest control information?"

From time to time we can see and read in this very forum how underplatings and types of natural birds can help with the so called "bad for roses pest." If the ARA couldn't read and understand the voices of several people to print some of the organic IPM information already posted, read and understood by others. I would have very high doubts that they would even concider printing any form of organic IPM information guideline anytime soon regardless of how many or few letters they get.

Let me take a wild guess on this alleged organic IPM mass emailing idea/subject.......... organic IPM is a news flash to the ARA and there webb site ?

"A little black spot between friends isnt such a bad thing"
I have no idea whos quote this belongs to

At least there making some people aware of it which is slightly better than not letting them be aware of it at all. Again to organic disease control on the webb site should be something the ARA should be able to be a bit more aware of as well.

The AARS is changing as well--they are no longer going to use public test gardens, so they can better evaluate disease resistance.