Whoohoo! I'm at work, but does this mean I have something to look forward to when I get home? (Other than coming home to the roses, that is....)

I'm so glad you posted this Karl because it reminded me that I needed to renew my membership. I sure didn't want to miss out on that handbook. As soon as I renewed via a phone call to the ARS, my magazine arrived in the mail and it was a good one. It contained pictures of some of the new rose introductions that we can look forward to next year. "Survivor" looks interesting. A HT that's touted as having been "DISEASE FREE" for the all the years it was trialed? How neat....Maryl

Thanks for sharing that. I'm going to get it for my neighbor and give it to her after I look at it!!

The 2011 Handbook for Selecting Roses is now available on the ARS website linked by Karl above. $5.00 plus $1.50 shipping.

Meh....I received my magazine but so far no handbook. Hopefully it's on the way!

When you look at the Handbook for Selecting Roses, just remember that unfortunately the ARS ratings still punish warm weather old roses such as teas, partially because they are, by definition not "winter hardy" and partially, in my opinion, because most of the rating forms are still being filled out by exhibitors, who have a completely different set of criteria, even under the "garden" category, than most people who just grow roses in their gardens.

I will give one example - in the beginning of the handbook they describe various types of roses. Here is the ENTIRE definition of tea roses: "Characterized as small-to-medium sized plants, 4 feet tall, teas have large blooms on weak stems which causes the flowers to droop. Flower form is symmetrical. This group is the forerunner of modern hybrid teas."

PLUUULEASE.....! Teas are suitable only to WARM WEATHER climates, where most of them grow huge and tall and wide - 8 to 10 feet easily. The definition above seems to have been written by someone in the UK or some other area not suitable to growing tea roses. The blooms on teas DO "nod" - this is a wonderful thing, as when you look UP at the blooms, they nod down at you and you can better admire them! They also bloom 10-12 months of the year, are easy care, and extremely long lived.

The color range of teas is elegant - a mix of buffs, pale pinks, pale yellows, whites, & medium pinks. Sometimes the blooms are 2-3 of these colors, or blooms on one bush are several colors. Amazing.

The description in the ARS handbook is as if I described rugosa roses as "weak, spindly things that only put out 3 blooms a year", because that's what the one specimen I have in my garden does. I would never describe rugosas like that, because I understand that my climate is totally unsuitable for rugosas, and I never should have planted one in the first place. I have seen magnificent hedges of them in Maine near the beaches, where they DO like the climate.

I just think it is so sad that the ARS is continuing, after all of these years, to bad mouth teas and other OGRs (you will frequently find articles in the ARS magazine that refer to OGRs as "once blooming", when most of them are ever-blooming, especially the warm weather types!).

Jackie

I'm glad you gave your description for Teas; an 8 foot tall bush with nodding blooms. You find those traits laudable, I do not. I'm NOT bashing YOUR choice of plant material nor the roses of other OGR enthusiasts, but your complaints of bias against the ARS publications have all been heard before.
I've certainly seen an increase in articles on OGR's over the years with at least a few per magazine. Even though I might not be interested in such articles I know that there are OGR people who support the ARS with their contributions and thus deserve a voice in the magazine, as do the rest of us who grow modern roses. Maybe you need to contact the powers that be at the ARS to update their description of "Teas". Additionally you could write an article for the magazine explaining your love of them and encouraging others to give them a try. The ARS has always welcomed articles written by it's members.

Karl, I was also delighted with the number and quality of articles in this month's ARS magazine. I really find it to be a valuable resource, and I'm always glad to get the new handbook. It was especially nice to see the article on Griffith Buck, and the sustainable rose garden.

"because most of the rating forms are still being filled out by exhibitors, who have a completely different set of criteria, even under the "garden" category, than most people who just grow roses in their gardens. "

If that's the case, it's our fault, not the ARS. A couple of years ago they opened up the Roses In Review to anyone who grows roses, including non-ARS members. Non-ARS members far outnumber exhibitors so if they got busy and filled out the report each year, and if that's really the reason for what you consider faulty ratings, the ratings would soon be corrected.
I fill it out every year and it can be done on-line. It can be accessed on the ARS website right now.

Here is a link that might be useful: Rate roses for Roses In Review

MaryL - Your suggestion to contact the ARS to see if they would update the description of tea roses in the Handbook is a good one. I have done so, contacting the current and a past President, both of whom understand what tea roses really are. It will be interesting to see if there is any change in the future - I hope so. As you could tell, I was really annoyed - it was as if the ARS had published a definition of HTs as "flowering annual bushes about 2 feet tall" because the person who wrote the description lived in the Arctic!

Karl - I have just filled out a Roses in Review form. Interestingly, although I grow over 100 different roses, only 3 of them were on the extensive list! One is a baby only 3 inches tall, but I did fill it out for the other two. I was disappointed that the category "OGRs and Shrubs" was 99% shrub roses, with only 1 or 2 OGRs.

You are correct, however, we must get people to fill out these reviews, although many folks I know who are interested in old roses have given up trying to make any headway with the ARS after years & years of trying. When I get in a fuss about something and want to change it, they say "Don't bother - we tried and nothing happened." - I am regarded as sort of naive and too hopeful sometimes, I think. To quote Maryl - "your complaints of bias against the ARS publications have all been heard before". That makes my point - the fact that they have been heard before makes it worse that the problem is still on-going and still needs to be complained about.

Personally, I like all kinds of roses, although I do prefer a romantic semi-wild looking garden, with huge climbers all over the house and many of the trees, huge hedges of roses between me and the street, and blooms peeking in all of the windows of my house, even the third story. My bedroom looks out over the canopy of a thicket of many trees, and there are roses decorating the canopy which have climbed up the trees. Of course, everyone's taste is different - that is what is so wonderful about roses - there are so many types and sizes and styles, that anyone can find roses to love. I do have some HTs that I have rescued from old gardens (including mine) - I do love the blooms and they are wonderfully fragrant too, being very old.

Jackie

Maryl -- the purpose of the ARS's annual review is just to add the new roses that came out during this year to the ARS's handbook. Your 100+ roses probably do not include many of those "newly in commerce" roses. The ARS also updates its older listings once every 5 years in a separate survey -- the so-called Quinquennial Survey. That is the time to put in your ratings on the OGRs that are not newly in commerce this year. The five year survey was just due on March 31, 2010, so it will be another 5 years before those older ratings get re-reviewed again. This new ARS Handbook for 2011 that has just come out should have the results for the recently completed 5 year survey.

p.s. There wree at least 3 threads on this forum that reminded people to submit their ratings before the 5 year survey closed.
Am I the only one who actually did it?
It was a big undertaking -- I think I had over 200 roses to separately rate.

Here is a link that might be useful: One of the old threads about the 5 year survey

Jackie,
Try contacting Phil Schorr about updating the tea roses information. . He edits the Handbook. I'd e-mail you off the Forum, but you have no e-mail address listed.
Phils e-mail is pschorr@att.net.

I'm eagerly awaiting the mailman. Maybe tomorrow?

Kathy: I think you got names mixed up. The person with 100 roses and talking about the RIR was not me. I've been a member of the ARs since 1987, so I'm well aware of the yearly RIR vs the 5 year general survey (which used to be every 3 years). The yearly RIR on newer cultivars is another excellent reason to belong to the ARS as the results of the survey are published in the January issue of the magazine. I always look forward to that one in particular. Has certainly saved me money by not buying the latest but not so greatest rose on the market....Maryl

Karl & Kathy - thanks for the info (yes, that was me who has the 100 roses, and I should have understood the fact that a survey of "newly in commerce" roses would not include many OGRs!).

Karl - It turns out that I was already exchanging emails with Phil Schorr about the very interesting article he wrote in the latest American Rose about the 5 year survey and how some roses are shooting up through the ratings. So, I did zip him a note about correcting the general description of tea roses in the beginning of the Handbook - thanks. His example in his article of Mme Joseph Schwartz (a tea rose) gives me hope - I have a theory that the older low ratings were a function of people trying to grow it in climates to which teas are not suited. It does well in my garden.

Jackie

Anyway,

Yep, sorry Maryl -- it was Jacqueline who seemed confused about the purpose of the annual survey.

Just received our copy. And was very surprised (and thrilled) to see a photo of our yellow brick road on page 34! That garden room was so much fun designing & planted.

I just finished the RIR survey ... with my collection of OGRs and weird roses, it only took about 15 minutes to review all 11 roses that I have on this year's survey. (Kathy, I did the 5-year survey too, so you're not out there by yourself.)

The Handbook arrived the other day, and I have been too wrapped up in other things to crack the cover. I put it aside to look at it later.

Connie