Jackie, it's because WE always want what is "new, improved, novel". We always have. Look at the American auto industry. Our affluence has always afforded us the luxury and the marketing departments played right into it. It's the only way to fuel the outrageous growth as a Nation we've enjoyed for the best century of our existence. It's also fueled some downright dishonesty and helped create the sociopathic behaviors of certain segments of the economy and notorious individuals.

Regional roses and their production is not a new idea. Nearly eighty years ago, the beginnings of that cry were printed by the ARS. The cold climate gardeners denounced the "all weather roses" because they froze to death in their climates. The really prominent players were mostly located in the Eastern Seaboard and they tired of having to replace frozen roses each spring, just we tire of having to pull out overgrown, under performing roses unsuitable for our climates.

There is an innate perversity in gardeners. We insist upon growing things which are NOT suited to where we are. We demand the nurseries carry whole lines which aren't happy here. Everyone wants to grow peonies, hostas, lilacs, daphnes, etc., whether they perform or not and we complain about how expensive they are. Guess why? The death rate, spoil rate, dump rate just to sell one or two. I experienced it at the beach and I've experienced it in the desert, from high-end to wholesale.

I've dealt with beach people who insisted Centifolias, Damasks, Albas would grow and bloom for them and they WANTED me to stock and sell them. Same with the desert. They didn't want what would flourish. Even when it is printed and they are told it doesn't do well, they insist they want them, because Graham Stuart Thomas, Peter Beales and their like wrote how wonderful they are. Never mind those books were written in ENGLAND, which is far removed from the environment THEY lived in.

Read these forums. How many times have you seen the hysteria for what's NEW, novel, different, whether it was suitable for where they were planted or not? There are many here, and many who used to be here, who have tired of repeating the admonitions of "it doesn't do well here" only to be fought with how it "did well in MY garden!"

Unsuitable plant and climate combinations CAN be forced to perform...for a while, but those will come back to bite you in the butt eventually. Paul Barden attempted Teas and other cold tender roses for years and he made them almost happy, until they all froze out on him. He posted about it. He won't try them again. My version is "you can grow penguins in Palm Springs IF you want to waste that kind of energy, time and other resources, but eventually they aren't going to be happy."

Nothing is continued to be produced nor offered if no one pays for it. Developing a new commercial variety which is an improvement over what exists already is an expensive proposition and requires national sales to adequately pay for it. That alone will limit new roses created by a large concern to only the highest sales areas, leaving the cold climates out "in the cold". It won't, however, eliminate those in the harsher areas from demanding the new roses, whether they are suitable or not. It also won't eliminate the home improvement stores and other retailers from offering "culls" cheaply, nor will it eliminate those who will continue to post how successful they were with $2, dried out, nearly dead unsuitable bare roots.

People will continue to gravitate to the cheap, "pig in a poke". They will continue throwing dollars at unsuitable roses. You can't fault any business for offering what the public is willing to pay for. If company A won't, company B will and will leave the rest who won't, in the dust. Though not worth the cost of dumping them to you and me, it's the market money which determines the value, or lack of it, for any product.

You can't educate everyone. Not everyone wants to be educated. All you can hope for is to educate yourself and purchase wisely. Being willing to listen to those who, like you, have thrown away their money in hopes of being able to grow the penguins in Palm Springs and failed, is the first step. Tiring of trying to share your experiences with those who refuse to listen and learn, comes very quickly.

The follies of your local rose society and their antics is the feeding frenzy which attempts to keep the excitement of what's new and novel alive. It's what helps to feed the market and is probably what's kept the industry alive as long as it's lived. WE think of roses as a potential one time purchase. Good or bad, in order to keep a burgeoning industry, they have to be as disposable as everything else. Until a rose sells for what it has cost to develop, produce and market, there won't be the research needed to develop new ones required for each climate. Ralph Moore was the last independent who could afford to support himself trying it. Paul Barden has worked toward that goal, and even he has hit the wall of being overwhelmed and unable to support his "habit" with too little reward. Can we honestly expect anything like it from a formal company with shareholders, salaries and taxes to pay? Kim