Rescue them if you have room even if temporary. An 8' climber in our zone is a real asset, and that is one beautiful rose. Is it a once-bloomer? The bloom form is beautiful. Many of the leaves are consistently un-serrated on one side. Don't want to flood your thread with the one I found, but it is somewhat similar, have more shots of the whole bush, etc., think it may be slightly darker. Sorry I don't know what yours (or this one) could be.

There is a difference in actually uploading content to GardenWeb versus merely providing a link to content on another site. If one uploads a photo to one of the GardenWeb galleries, then you grant to GardenWeb a license for it's use per the terms of use agreement. But a link is not content. If one uses the link option provided at the bottom of a post block to some other web site, it would be preposterous to think GardenWeb then has a license to all that linked site has in content. A link manufactured by the poster in the body of a message is no different, even if it links to content that the poster owns. The link that plantman56 used to display the photo did not give GardenWeb a license for it's use. I see no reason for posters to avoid sharing their photos by linking to them, for you give away no rights by doing so. Uploading directly to a GardenWeb gallery should not be done if you don't want to give GardenWeb a license. Did Nunan infringe plantman56's copyright? Probably. It would seem that plantman56 didn't give Nunan a right to it's use. But plantman56 did upload the photo to Webshots, subject to Webshots' terms of use, which states ... a nonexclusive, irrevocable, worldwide, sub licensable, royalty-free license to use, store, display, publish, transmit, transfer, distribute, reproduce, create derivative works of and publicly perform that Content on and through each of the services provided by Webshots. The worrisome words used are 'irrevocable', 'sub licensable', and 'royalty free'. Did Webshots sub license the photo use to Nunan? We don't know. It's a good idea to read the terms of service before uploading to any site. Compare the terms of service of Photobucket to those of Webshots. Photobucket does not include the words 'irrevocable' or 'sub license'. Copyright is federal law and recourse for infringement can be found in US Circuit Court. Failure to place the copyright symbol on a work or failure to register the work does not bar one from recovery, though it may limit the recovery. Where the infringement was via the internet, some parties may be protected unless notified of the infringement in a formal manner.

Thanks folks, for the kind comments. I do love by birds and gardening. Kathi-MDGD..."Oriole" nectar is just hummingbird nectar (4 parts water, one part white sugar) served in a larger "Oriole" feeder. The way to prevent feeder dominance is to put out more feeders and spread them out as much as possible. Perhaps put one on the east side of the house and one on the north. Or put two or three feeders out but have several feet between them. The more feeders there are, the harder it is for a dominant oriole or hummer to claim them all. I rarely fill my feeders all the way, since I empty and replace the nectar two to three times a week. Sour or fermented sugar water will do more harm than good to the birds. So I normally fill them maybe 1/4 full. My oriole feeders are the older style with rubber plugs over the feeding ports. I remove the port plugs on at least two sides and the orioles, hummingbirds, finches, woodpeckers, and all the other birds can all drink the sugar water. If you have the larger nectar feeder, with larger ports, nearly all the feeder birds will drink it. Once the yellow jackets arrive, usually mid- to late-August here, I replace the port covers to slow down the YJs. The orioles and hummers can continue drinking. . A male oriole at the feeder. . Mr. and Mrs. House Finch at the oriole feeder. . A hummingbird at the oriole feeder . And the oriole feeder here in Larimore with an oriole. You can't prove it by these photos, LOL, but I normally only color the water in the early spring for the first filling. After that it's usually clear. It seem like every photo I had shows colored water. I'll have to fix that. I don't want to set a bad example. LOL

They say people buy houses with emotions - and I surely bought this house with my emotions. I fell crazy in love with the house the moment I laid eyes on it. Probably paid a little too much, but the seller replumbed the house for us and did a good, good job (probably a $10,000 repair job) and fixed the slate roof (not cheap either) and re-wired much of the house (probably another $5,000+). The boiler was replaced in 2004 with a high-efficiency unit, and that's a plus. So, I console myself that much of the big ugly work was already done before we bought it. It's got some nice features, such as a full basement (Very unusual for southeastern Virginia) and a huge attic with a spacious walk-up staircase. The house (and the 'hood) went through hard times in the 1980s and this fine old home was used as a boarding house. They had deadbolts on the bedroom doors and there was a family living on the sunporch (very small) and another family living in the attic (with pink insulation dripping from the ceiling). In 2004, some guys bought it for the purpose of flipping it. After two years, they grew tired of it and ran out of money before they could do too much harm (thank goodness) and that's when we bought it. It was a diamond in the rough when we bought it and we've dumped too much money into it, but hubby has a nice job with the city and I tell him, "This house is your GIFT to the city." :-) It's true, too. But there are days when I wonder about the wisdom of buying such an old house that requires a steady influx of cash, love, inspiration and perspiration. Nonetheless, when I trot downstairs in the morning and see that beautiful entry foyer, I always feel a little happier. I tell people that this house is a beautiful sculpture made of wood and designed so that people can live within its beautiful walls and admire its artistic grandeur from many different angles. I do believe that. It's also 100% identical to the house in which I was raised. That's probably why I grabbed my new husband by the lapels in February 2007 when we stood in its empty living room and said, "I HAVE TO HAVE THIS HOUSE." It was built in 1925 by a man who owned the local lumber mill and his wife became ill whilst it was under construction. He urged her to hold on promising her, "I'm building you the most beautiful house." She died six months after moving in and her funeral was held in the living room. It was a home built with love and that shows in every joint and every piece of lumber. Of all the houses I've ever seen, this is one of the best-built. These fantastically huge beams in the basement have no knots. They say the original builder hand-selected each beam and joist before it was delivered to the site. I believe that. Thanks for saying nice things about my house. Makes me feel better about having bought the old lady. :) Here's a photo of the man who built it, sitting in *our* backyard (from the 1950s).