You're HT's should produce and bloom regularly, even going completely organic. Alfalfa meal, fish meal and black cow or horse manure will give your roses a BIG kick in the pants to bloom like crazy and produce lush, green foliage. Feed the soil and the soil will feed your roses.

"Feed the soil and the soil will feed your roses."

*** WELL SAID, Ken!

In my little corner of Virginia, organic is being interpreted by the master gardeners (and thus all county and state properties) to mean nothing store bought. The historic garden where I work only uses compost and horse manure. Nate may be in a similar situation.

My mother had both Tropicana and Bewitched in her rose garden when I was growing up. She regularly sprayed and heavily fertilized them. They liked that treatment and produced big flushes, but all those chemicals.... These two roses, from what I saw, were very feeders. Bewitched was one of my favorites because of the lovely pink color of her flowers. I don't recall that the growth habit was all that attractive. Now I have the same garden, but these two roses aren't ones I choose to grow because of the chemical dependency.

Would it be possible to consider a California native species rose? The species certainly was around well before the house was built. One that I can recommend highly is Rosa californica 'First Dawn'. It is a fairly new selection of the species, but still the species nonetheless. It is the heaviest blooming Rosa californica I've ever seen--blooms repeatedly throughout the year in massive flushes. Plus the scent is intoxicating and wafting. I feed only very occasionally with diluted fish emulsion. No spraying.

Time for a soil test, especially in an older garden. That could give you insight to problems like alkaline PH, salt build up, compaction & nutrition balance. It's worth every penny.

Comtesse, no need for apologies. We all need to be more connected to nature.

I meant tilling in large amounts of compost (not undecomposed green waste) before the roses are planted as a way to ensure healthy plants--I'm not at that step, sorry for being confusing. I don't know whether this was done initially at my garden. We have been mulching with green waste (containing leaves) since I've been at the nonprofit.

I'm definitely picking up that if I want more flowers I need to fertilize! We'll see if it flies... Cecily, I believe the view point at my nonprofit is that fertilizer (even organic) is bad because it's unnatural and promotes overly lush growth that requires more water. Many native plant gardeners in my area NEVER use ANY fertilizer at all. Personally I don't agree with this. In my study plot at Cal Poly Pomona I am finding the Baja native Rosa minutifolia definitely responds to light fertilizer and compost. This is in comparison to a planting of R. minutifolia I did at a local Botanical Garden where I didn't use any amendment.

Tessiess, I've been lurking over your posts on Rosa californica, minutifolia, early yellows, etc so I already know about First Dawn :-)

Thanks All,

Nate

I doubt if the Association would allow Nate to plant Natives. The problem is that they are asking you to grow fussy, mid-20th-Century, chemical-dependent roses AS IF they were native plants. Ain't gonna work.

You COULD try them on Tea Roses -- but even they are going to need time/water to become established.

You COULD try pre-WWII Hybrid Tea Roses . . . It's reasonable to assume that those might still have been grown in that house's era. Look at things like 'Snowbird' (1936) which is a bloomin' fool and 'Lady Mary Fitzwilliam' (1880), along with 'Mme. Caroline Testout' (1890) . . . Those might well have been included in a mid-Century garden -- and they are tough-enough to get along and bloom with no help and even sparse water -- once-established. What else? Maybe 'Gen. MacArthur'?? (1904) We found him blooming his head off in a deserted garden on Mare Island -- knee-deep in weeds. And even 'Talisman' (1929)

Here's 'Snowbird':

Seems like the biggest issue is treating HT roses that have some rather high needs like a native wildflower. I love natives, but I recognize the difference in what they need to thrive. If the goal is a period look, it would help to remember that the look required is not a wildflower meadow and will require some different thought. Kind of like wanting to have a zoo with a lion but only wanting to feed hay.

"Kind of like wanting to have a zoo with a lion but only wanting to feed hay." Got some laughs out of this one!!!

Appreciate your suggestions Jeri....we're probably not looking at bringing any new plants in though. I do bring up replacing some of the roses, but we're in conservation mode, being assoc/ with a museum of mid-century modern arts/crafts. Many of the plants are virused, and they get bad rust in winter. I've learned not to look too closely.

Sorry Phyllis I had missed your comment about the soils test. Sounds like a good idea. Nate

Perfect simile: "Kind of like wanting to have a zoo with a lion but only wanting to feed hay."

I don't think I see a reasonable solution to this problem.

Jerijen - beautiful roses, i just have to say. I'm thinking of adding more whites to my collection and some bi-colors too.

I'm told that at one time, 'Snowbird' was one of the top exhibition roses in California. Arguments raged over whether it, or 'White Ensign' was superior -- but W.E. is no longer available in the U.S., and 'Snowbird' is.

We collected Snowbird from the long-neglected grounds of a once-lovely home in the San Fernando Valley -- where it had suffered total neglect for a very long time. Last I heard, even through drought and heat, with no water, it survives still -- tho it may not survive the renovation in progress to the home.

It's a trouper. Blooms like mad with no care, and disease-free (at least in CA) as well. I'm glad it is in the Sacramento Historic City Cemetery, now. But in any case, you can still buy it -- from Burlington Rose Nursery and maybe from Rogue Valley Roses, as well.

Oh-ohhh...that Lady Mary is a gorgeous creature! If anyone's interested, there are a few more pics and a little bit of commentary on older HTs at:

rosomanes.blogspot/newbeginnings

(I promise I WILL learn how to post links, one day soon.)

Yeah, the lion and the hay thing... very succinctly put, Kippy - I wish I had your gift for brevity! Some people do seem to be able to keep mainly vegetarian cats and dogs alive and very healthy, though, so maybe there is a way...don't know about lions, or mid- 20th Century Hybrid Teas...

Nate, I'm not sure why your boss is insisting on this particular style of cultivation. Firstly, it seems inconsistent with the ethos of preserving an authentic mid-century experience, and secondly, I'm not sure why it's necessary for environmental reasons. Gardeners have been using locally obtained animal poo and suchlike for centuries, and I'm not sure we'd even be able to keep ourselves fed with organic fruit and vegetables without adding some such nutrients to the soil. The system suggested would work well for mainly hunter-gatherers, but that's a long way from ornamental gardening in the 1950s, and trying to preserve these intrinsically fussy, sickly plants.

As I'm sure you're aware, there are a variety of naturally derived organics and minerals like Milk, Bicarb Soda, Lime, Sulphur and Copper which are helpful for controlling disease, etc. and which are generally accepted as causing no harm to the environment. I think there's still an Organic Rose Growing forum, that may be a useful resource if you were to go down that path. Ken says it can be done (growing modern HTs organically), so he may be able to advise further. There's also a lady somewhere on this forum who's recently switched to organic methods for her large collection of mainly HTs; from memory I believe she said she had to give up on about 1/3 of them though, to make it work. I think she's been exploring 'Antique' Roses now to replace some of them. Biodynamics might be another avenue to look into, and/or incorporating companion planting, etc.

Your forward-looking 50s craftsman and his wife were of an era in which the new fertilisers and pesticides were joyfully and universally embraced as saviours and the way of the future. Caring for the the environment in the way we currently understand it was not part of the ethos of the 1950s/early 60s, and I doubt whether the HTs produced in that era would have found a market were it not for the harmful chemicals that were necessary for their cultivation.

I hope I/we haven't come over a bit too strong with all these responses, but I do think some compromises may be necessary. The furniture/design/art thing and the whole project with the house and garden sounds fascinating - I'd love to come and see it some day! I wish you all the very best getting the garden difficulties sorted. Oh, including the pruning! (Not sure how much help we've been with that...)

Comtesse :¬D

The way i look at is essentially, you can't get something from nothing. Naturally, the soil would be fed by fallen leaves, dead animals, insects and animal waste. In our unatural gardens, that doesn't happen in the same way, and so we must make up the difference, either with organic means, (slow food) or inorganic (fast food). This is exacerbated in our ornamental gardens by density of planting and by growing plants not well suited to the area, both of which boxes the ht's tick. So the advice to find a way of feeding them is good, but only solves the rebloom part of the problem.

Heavy pruning might to my mind be contributing to it - I dont know enough about the ht's you mention to know for sure, but some roses are not good candidates for maintaining at smaller heights than they naturally want to be, so instead of reblooming they put what energy they have into growing longer canes. Obviously, I don't know what the layout and views are like but would it be possible to explore various means of training the worst of the view blockers instead of repeatedly chopping them down? You could short pillar them, or trellis fan, or peg them over a hazel hoop type affair perhaps?

To get fewer, larger blooms (say, for exhibition) we are taught to prune hard.
To get an enhanced display in the garden (say, more blooms on shorter stems) we are advised to prune more lightly.
(All of this, aside from the issue of feeding -- either soil, or plants, or both.)

Something I wanted to add for all who read this, most of the people who post on the Rose forums actually are gardening "organically" They may occasionally use a spray for a problem or round up to kill an invader, but for the most part I mostly see forum members avoiding the toxins

"Organic" is kind of a loose term I have seen organic gardeners refer to spraying windex, using dawn dish soap, Chinese grown feed and all kinds of things I would never spray in my garden and say it was organic. On the other hand, some take it to the extent of calling some one who uses a drip system not organic because the water is supplied via plastic lines. I would love to get my garden "certified organic" so I could sell at the local farmers markets BUT I don't want to be told I can't use horse manure on my roses or dried ground chicken manure on the tiny grass patch I am keeping because those are not certified or have to toss my gallon of fish emulsion be cause the certificate expired one year and I am still using it the next .... My dad was one of those nutty guys back in the 60's telling everyone to feed the soil, let the leave lay and compost and quit using the DDT. I think he would take issue with much of what falls under the term "organic" now

He was SO RIGHT.

I never say we grow organically. We occasionally resort to chemical fertilizers in selected areas, for one thing. I just say that "we don't spray" -- and we don't other than with a garden hose.

Oddly I did spray this week.... But it was one of the certified organic and safe sprays (I have one area that certain colors of rose buds are not opening some look eaten but not sure by what) trying to make sure that should it be some kind of unseen bug I do not share it with the rest of the grade when I move the plant (potted) to a different spot

All right, thanks everyone, forwarded your collective advice to give more organic nitrogen to the roses. I still think some of the plants have been pruned too harshly. Nate

It's funny, though; I wouldn't like to argue with the collective experience of all the gardeners here, but in theory at least, isn't it Phosphorous (eg banana skins, manure, vermicompost) and Potassium (eg Potash, kelp) that mainly affect bloom and fruit production, rather than Nitrogen (eg in composted green waste, coffee grounds)? I'd always understood that N promotes lots of green, leafy growth (which if overused attracts sap-sucking insects, etc). Can anyone clarify?

Back to pruning. If it was me in your situation, I would prune just to shape the bush the way you think it will grow nicely to the eye. Prune it hard (below mid thigh) and you will have fewer blooms. Prune it lightly (above head) and you will have a mess of blooms out of sight and a lot of them will be on thin canes. Prune mildly (gut to mid chest) and I think you will be happy with the results. Don't forget, feed your soil and the soil will feed your bush and a happy bush will produce blooms.

Comtesse, that's what I was wondering about too. Wouldn't low N conditions produce a leaner plant that is more drought resistant? With container-grown California native sages, high- Nitrogen fertilizer exacerbates powdery mildew. But I had also heard that Nitrogen is an important nutrient for roses (I'm hearing that in this thread too). Be nice if someone could clarify.

Ken, I'd like to prune by eye for each plant but the manager wants pruning for views. Heights are stairstepped toward the back of the bed. I think I am going to ask for a compromise incorporating the stairstepped heights with more gentle pruning. More of the plants in the front have died, I think probably because of the rough pruning treatment to 12-18".

12-18 inches? OF COURSE They died!

Comtesse -- When I suggest alfalfa -- or horse manure from horses eating it -- I'm suggesting it in large part for the plant growth hormones naturally occurring in the alfalfa. Not for nitrogen. Too much nitrogen and you will, yes, have rampant leafy growth (and attract load of aphids, btw).

Anyhow -- Nate . . . Anyone who thinks that you cannot kill roses by pruning too hard is . . . well, wrong. You certainly CAN. Particularly in the case of roses like 'Brandy,' that go back to the Pernetianas.

I'm thinking your manager might ought to just plant Salvia, and have done with it.

Am I the only one who wants to smack the manager upside the head?

Buford, I'm with you!

Ok, so they WERE being pruned too harshly. The ones toward the back do seem much healthier. N

Perhaps it would be a good idea to grow something "not-rose" at lower levels, where short plants are required. Dwarf lavender comes to mind . . .

I'm with jerijen.....you need horse manure. If there is an objection to the look of it then cover it up with mulch or compost it somewhere out of sight until it falls apart. I would mix it with leaves, fruit scraps, etc and let it compost anyway. Then spread it on and water well. People do love the big HT flowers but you have to feed something to get them. Around here, horse manure and chipped up tree trimmings are free. You just need someone with a truck or trailer to go get it.

These are not the tall kind anyway. These days there are some super tall HT types coming along for sale. Good luck with your lions.

The rose garden is a little plain right now, just roses. There won't be any deliberate removal of unsuited plants in place of others because of the preservation mentality. Eventually as more of the roses in front die we'll have to think of something.

Yeah, the lions. But they will probably still be treated as hay eaters. It's the political viewpoint of resource-consumptive western horticulture and of fertilizer (even organic) of forcing unnatural growth which must then be supported with xtra water. Doesn't matter what the actual visual results are, it's a political issue.

I understand that -- but then they surely must accept that plants treated in that manner will not be an asset to the property. In fact, will detract from it.

If that is the politics, then the plants should be removed. It's like trying to use a gas guzzling SUV on electric power. It's an anachronism.

I'm not sure, but believe there are probably communication problems betw/ my manager and the Director. Growing the roses well would be an opportunity to have the garden be an expression of the value the organization places in craft. It's a foundation for Arts and Crafts after all. Admin knows about the results I've obtained in other areas of the garden and I'm considering writing a letter to them about the roses.

Thanks for helping me think all this through J!!!

Just saw your post Buford. He he. Maybe if I manage to communicate with admin w/out being terminated it will be an opportunity for more open communication. Any ideas about what the good horticulture of roses would be described as? I don't think it would be considered a craft, but would it be under the title of husbandry?

Can you suggest they add some nitrogen-fixing plants to the rose beds? That might give them a little boost. Many of the native nitrogen-fixers probably won't tolerate the amount of water (too much) that hybrid teas need, but perhaps some non-native ones would work. Such as clover. Sweet clover is really pretty in the garden.

The word you might be looking for is edaphology, the influence of soil on living things.

Tessies I think that may be the one suggestion that would fly. Thank you!!

Fduk, thanks, had not heard of that, you learn something new every day. What I meant was the skilled gardening that leads to best results, and how that was related to craft, which is what the nonprofit is supporting. It would include soil prep and best pruning practices etc. I think husbandry may be the best term.

Sounds good.

I was the one who had asked for help and all of you have been extremely generous with your knowledge. I am starting to feel a little uncomfortable, considering the discussion has been management related, and I'm not the manager...I have forwarded the general recommendation for high-N fertilizer to my boss.

Originally I had thought that my question was simply related to pruning which is a non-political issue in my department.

If anyone has any burning suggestions I'll definitely listen but the truth of the matter is I may not be able to do ANYTHING about roses at my nonprofit and I don't want to waste any of your time.

Nate

A couple of thoughts:

First, when I suggested feeding the soil and plant, I meant with something more balanced. I use the horse manure to loosen the soil and hold moisture. I know it feeds the roses too but I still use fish emulsion for more elements. Although I did hear a big museum curator say they used lawn food on their roses

The second is when do you prune the roses? Maybe that is part of the issue

And last, if pruning is of, maybe removing and disposing the rusty leaves rather than allow to fall could be part of that pruning routine

I'm with Kippy. BALANCED feeding of soil and plants is far better than "high-nitrogen fertilizers." If you use a chemical fertilizer, I would recommend something balanced ... 14-14-14 . . . 20-20-20 ... something like that. "High Nitrogen" will only bring you insect problems.

And for disease -- well -- I really prefer to remove things that are uncontrollably-disease-prone. Rust on new foliage, for instance, is unacceptable to me (fine on old foliage at the end of the year).

Raingreen, my rose society in So. CA recommends pruning end of January to early February and deadheading thereafter. They also lightly prune end of August, beginning of September in order to enjoy fall blooms. Here is a rosecare guide that I find helpful, only I choose to skip all the spraying stuff: Monthly Rose Care by SCV rose society in So. Cal. I also found this video helpful, because it is specific to California and explains why we rip off the leaves of our rose bushes when we do our winter pruning: Pruning Roses in California. I hope these two guides will rejuvenate your roses.

We were late this year pruning, last week in Feb, which was partly my fault. For most of the roses it was still ok altho for a few I had to cut off a lot of new growth :-( shame on me for being late.

We do try to collect all old leaves including old brown ones. Of course being ecological stewards we don't throw them out but use them as mulch elsewhere in the garden. I haven't noticed new growth being affected by rust but to be honest I wouldn't notice it unless it was a major problem, I'm spread a little thin. The major disease pattern is rust (sometimes heavy) affecting the half-dormant plants in the winter. Powdery mildew is usually not really a problem.

I've been wondering at the rust problem. I've been visiting Huntington Library's rose garden every December and rust is present but definitely not as bad as at my nonprofit. I had heard secondhand that they did not spray but I should ask them directly. I believe part of the problem in our garden is the close planting. We need more air circulation.

Copy on balanced fertilizer, will be sure to forward.

Jasmine, thanks for your tips. We would definitely end up doing the minimalist calendar and omit any spraying including dormant spray. If we did end up using any fertilizer at all probably once a year. My boss is politically against fertilizer, considering it unnatural, even if it is considered organic. An awkward situation, but I'm trying to make baby steps toward better results.

Hmm. Maybe it the lawn fertilzer ......

Don't understand???

(Carruth uses lawn fertilizer at the Huntington)

Re: alfalfa. I've read wildly differing reports of it's NPK content; some saying it's especially high in nitrogen(eg 512), some saying it's a very good balance (usually still slightly lower in P, eg 212 or 323). It seems it varies according to the source/form. All agree it also contains a fabulous assortment of minor and micro-nutrients, thus, as Jeri points out, making it an especially effective rose fertiliser/amendment. As I understand it, the micronutrients make other nutrients more bio-available, amongst other benefits.

I've been wondering lately about growing it amongst roses - it has a very pretty violet-blue flower which I thought might be a reasonable alternative to eg catmint in aesthetically complementing the roses. However, I haven't actually seen it growing to be sure of of whether the whole plant would actually look good enough. Since alfalfa hay is often on sale around here, I'm assuming it suits our hot, dry Mediterranean (mild, wettish winter) climate.

The point I'm getting at is that after flowering, it could

1) be used as a green manure, ie cut down at ground level leaving the roots in the soil to do their nitrogen-fixing thing;

2) the stems could simply be chopped and left on the soil as mulch, providing soil moisture evaporation protection (or composted first, if preferred)

3) meanwhile all its other important minerals and micronutrients would be released into the soil as it gradually rots down

4) eventually the whole plant would become incorporated into the soil, where it could do its spongy long-term moisture retention/soil structure improvement thing...

5) sow more alfalfa. Or maybe it would self-seed if plants were left long enough before cutting down?

I kind of think this sounds like it could make for a pleasingly simple and cheap all-purpose system, in theory at least! Nate, maybe some system like this could be just enough to keep your HTs fed and healthy??? While placating management's rather unusual horticultural 'idees fixes' - 'cos after all, you're only putting back what was actually growing there. Of course they wouldn't have grown alfalfa with their HTs in the 50s!! :¬D - but maybe management could be persuaded, perhaps, say, to allow it to be grown as a border around the bed if not actually between the rose bushes - like the clover suggestion, though ahem!.. rather more conspicuous?

Just a thought, anyway... I'd be very interested to know if anyone has actually tried this, or has any comments/ thoughts on the idea.

Comtesse :¬)

Nate, I wouldn't worry too much about the amount of thought people are putting into it - in my experience, gardeners love a good conundrum to chew over and rose people are simply a subset of gardener after all. Threads like this are useful for building the communal knowledge base. ;)

I dunno about growing alfafa directly in the beds - it has a really vigourous root system and might well be too much competition for the roses. I think the sweet clover idea might work better, or maybe sweet peas, if the area isn't too hot for them, there are some very low growing sprawly groundcover varieties.

My Coastal SoCal attempts at growing alfalfa has been that it mildews wonderfully

Thanks for the fertilizer tip Kippy.

Appreciate the creative suggestions. I think Alfalfa would fit aesthetically and it is a Mediterranean native, but I also agree with fduk that it would be competitive. As a crop it is about 2' tall in Pennsylvania, which would be a bit too tall but I don't know if there are short varieties. Dry gardeners in soCal and South Australia who want to use alfalfa may want to get the Dormancy 9 varieties which are very winter-active and would go dormant in summer. Maybe thereby mildew could be avoided because of the seasonal differences from conventional alfalfa. Don't know.