I would be hesitant to put this information on the internet, if I knew the answer. The answers would be 'out there' forever and not everyone is a good person. For small cemeteries, there is no staff and there is too much negative mischief that can be done. You might get a better response by contacting someone in the area and asking off line. I hope this doesn't seem off-putting, but there are too many people out there with too much herbicide and time on their hands.

I appreciate the comments and concerns about maintenance, and the following is NOT a rant, but rather my attempt at clarifying the specifics of this site. These are things I've thought and talked about with the caretaker. I first approached him about this back in early Summer. Being recognized as a historic site by the state of NJ, they do get quite a few hands working on keeping things up. Volunteers from Rutgers University have been coming by this Autumn to clean, prime, and repaint the fence. The small water feature was donated by a church member, and installed by the caretaker. All the plants you see in there already were donated -- and in many cases planted -- by church members. They get together for leaf raking and shredding in Autumn. Brian, the caretaker, has shared with me his desire to create something really beautiful, but he's limited by cost. He's been expanding beds, but doesn't have much more than divisions of church members' plants to fill them. Since he lives on-site, this is effectively his back yard, and I saw him out there almost daily during the growing season -- he also maintains a small veggie garden for the church which I didn't photograph. [The church is across the street from my job, and down the street from the Starbucks from where I collect used coffee grounds daily.] I told him that a few old roses could make good "anchor shrubs" around which he can continue to spread the companion plants he already has in abundance. This is not an empty stretch of land that some people "say" they'd like improved but don't do anything about it -- and this is why I took interest in it. When I was in Buffalo, I was approached by my "block club" about helping to put together a proposal for a city grant to buy plants for the empty space at the end of the street. We did get a few volunteers for helping to put it together, but I did much of the work by myself. As my free time started to shrink from classes and a busier work schedule, "maintenance" became me going down there once a week to pull weeds and pick up garbage. Once things were planted, the attitudes I kept hearing from non-participating neighbors about how "the college kids will ruin it" morphed into "no one will take care of it" -- and it was the latter which became true. So in essence, I lived on a block full of people complaining about how the neighborhood looked crappy and no one was doing anything about it, yet they themselves were reticent to make the first step -- or even keep things going after others got things started for them. I lived there for three years, and became well aware -- as they knew I am a "downstater" myself -- of that "blame everyone else" attitude for their deep-seated Rust Belt woes. What I at first thought would be an example of the "Stone Soup" story coming to life and igniting a desire for further improvement became an example of how throwing some money at something isn't enough to make a change -- you need people willing to keep it going. But this isn't what I find at this location. Instead, I find someone with the desire, energy, and know-how to make something beautiful here, but is limited by funds. Yes, there are plenty of roses I can't grow in my yard which I'd like to see in this garden, but this isn't going to be "my garden". I'd like to see them there because they'd be appropriate there, and the caretaker agrees. As for tree maintenance, as far as I can tell none is performed, other than raking leaves. I will speak to Brian in more detail about having roses up in them, but he has already expressed interest when I asked if he'd want that. In the meantime, I don't have any roses on-hand right now that will be planted there. I do have an order for Spring, but that's it. I also have my own "inventory" from which I can propagate, as well as whatever I can propagate from the Peggy Rockefeller Rose Garden, and whatever I can get donated. If it turns out I have too much, any "leftovers" will go back to the HRF. So, in the end, this will be about me saying to Brian "Hey, I have this, and I think it'd work over there....want it? Oh, and what about putting this one over here...it'll get this big eventually, so you'll need that much space." He's really the designer. I'm just sharing my rose info with -- and trying to "make plants happen" for -- him. :-) ~Christopher

I suppose there really is nothing more to do at this point but wait to see what transpires at the April 13 meeting, except for those who have not yet written a letter of protest to someone at the City. The more protests the better, needless to say. Keeping fingers crossed!

I've just submitted a response in the comments section below the article (currently awaiting approval), and would encourage everyone who cares about this issue to do the same. Those in charge need to know how many people around the world, as well as locals and dedicated volunteers are devastated at the way this World Heritage Treasure is being vandalised - apparently clandestinely to avoid the inevitable outcry - in what I believe to be the misguided pursuit of 'historical accuracy'. If we had only known about this we could perhaps have organised something - no doubt the reason it was done without informing anyone. Jeri, I'm so sorry. I know many of these roses must have been almost like family members to you; discovered, collected and lovingly preserved by you personally and by others, many now departed. I guess we'll just have to wait a while to see whether or not Mr Liggett's 'rejuvenation' theories are correct - and see what survives this brutal attack. As for the decision to remove the arches over the pathways, if as seems to be the case they they are not to be replaced by something similar but 'safer', this is surely a senseless retrograde step for both the aesthetics and functionality of the garden, and one which I sincerely hope will be reconsidered. Even if there were few if any arches there in the original scheme, that is no reason arches should never be added, if it is an improvement. The cemetery is a living Museum, and any Museum undergoes periodic changes to make it a more convenient and pleasant space for visitors, and to better display the treasures within.