I'm quite a bit older than BassandBonsai, but I was noticing a similar pattern as I was reading this thread. It seems to me that it is mainly Californians who despise Dr. Huey, complaining that he too easily takes over and suckers a lot. Almost everyone non-Californian and Zone 6 and further north claims not to have any of those problems, or very rarely at best. I'm sure it's possible that there are Californians somewhere that haven't had Dr. Huey problems, as well as Zone 6 and further north gardeners who have experienced too many Dr. Huey problems. However, they aren't appearing here on our GW thread. So what do you think? Any validity to my observation here that it is only, or maybe primarily, Californians who have problems with Dr. Huey? If so, I'd be curious to find out WHY. What is there about California weather, soil, growing conditions, whatever, that makes Dr. Huey too vigorous and overpowering and excessively suckering? And if it is true that this is a primarily California problem, then maybe it is NOT true the death/near death of the more tender top plant is the main cause of why a Dr. Huey take-over occurs (though that is definitely the main and perhaps only way the take-over tends to occur in Zone 6 and further north). Since I have never grown roses in California, I can say nothing about that experience. But I can definitely state that in the midwest, Zone 6, I bury the grafts a couple inches and that I have never had anything sucker nor any rose get overpowered by Dr. Huey. Whether there is or is not a connection, I don't know, but I have been growing some of my roses for 15 or more years. The only exception to that rule in my yard (midwest Zone 6) is what happened before I moved here. I'm told a woman used to live here who was a wonderful gardener--and I still have legacies of some of her accomplishments growing in my garden. However, the one legacy I got rid of were several Dr. Hueys. Whether she was growing Dr. Huey or Dr. Huey took over after she left and no one cared for her gardens, I couldn't say. By the way, I did let her Dr. Hueys grow a couple years here--I was curious about them. Found out they are gorgeous in their springtime bloom and wretched plants the rest of the year. They no longer live here, needless to say. : ) Kate

"If my reward for that kindness is to have to deal with unscrupulous creeps who feel entitled to do as they please with my work, then something needs to change." But, it really is the bad percentage that we often react to, isn't it. I'm sure you've had a ton of profiteers stealing your work, but are they really the majority of people using your work? (and by using, I mean, visiting your site, reading your site, looking at your photos.) I would guess the majority, were people who -didn't- take your stuff, and just really enjoy your website. (How many hits does your site get and how many instances of copyright violation are there?) I can totally see how you'd get tired and frustrated from having to protect your copyright. Your site was one of the first that I found when I was looking for more information on Old Roses. (Google quite likes you as I'm sure you know.) And it's your choice. So please don't think I'm blaming you. But something doesn't necessarily "need to change". It has to change for you because that's where you're personal line of "enough is enough" is, but it's a choice. All the emails I've gotten over the years, and the friends I've made from being online and the unusual opportunities,... those to me outweigh my personal profiteers. Everyone has to make their own choices as to where that "worth it" line is. Like I said before, I have friends (who are artists) who don't post their work online for these reasons. campanula - I think if someone owns the copyright to something, it should not be stolen, according to the legal rules of copyright (whatever that is in each instance). I don't think that it's related to how famous or even how talented the owner of the copyright is. I don't really understand why we even have to argue the worth or how "professional" something is. If you create a work of art, you own the copyright. Even if it is hideous or amateurish. on the notion of taking photos of people's private gardens without permission. I must admit that over the past few months, when I drive by a house with a particularly beautiful garden, I stop and quickly take a photo. I've been saving these photos in a private folder on my computer. At one point, I'd thought about posting a thread sharing the photos so that other people could admire or be inspired by them, but then, I was also worried that perhaps by chance, one of the garden owners might see the thread and somehow be annoyed that I'd posted a photo of their garden without permission. So I haven't, and probably wont.

I have grown both David Austin roses and OGRs in Southern California. I no longer grow OGRs, and I have become a David Austin rose addict. Many Austin roses now have exceptional health, very good repeat bloom and heavenly fragrance. While some OGRs are also strong in these same categories, I know of few that put all the qualities together in the same rose. What I have found especially lacking in OGRs (with the exception of the Portland Rose de Rescht) is a good repeat bloom. Many do not repeat at all, and of those that do rebloom, it is often just a light autumn bloom. I once tried to grow the once-blooming Damask Madame Hardy, and I don't think it produced more than 3 flowers in the 3 or 4 years that I grew it. I don't think it liked the lack of chill in Southern California. I finally removed it. In contrast, I find that many, but not all, David Austin roses equal or surpass the OGRs in their old-fashioned beauty and fragrance; and some are in almost constant bloom. My prime example is the Austin rose Tamora. The repeat bloom in my garden has been as good as any floribunda, and I find the myrrh fragrance to be exceptional. Some people complain that Austin roses are too big for ordinary gardens, but there are cultivars that remain relatively small. Prospero reliably holds to the size of a floribunda in my garden, and Tamora is a little bigger. I also am growing some new varieties that most probably will remain the size of a floribunda or HT: Young Lycidas, Olivia Rose Austin, Boscobel, Munstead Wood, Princess Alexandra of Kent and Heathcliff. Many of the bigger Austin shrub roses make good climbers, and there are repeat-blooming ramblers, as well. I am growing The Albrighton Rambler along my balcony, and I have been very pleased with its repeat bloom and health. All-in-all, David Austin roses are by far my favorites.

Flowers, I hope that snow melts fast. It's finally springish here, but our winter, like yours, came in Feb/Mar while January was mild. I'm glad it's been late because it gave me more time to rest. I know you don't like chemistry, but here goes on soil acidity, boring as it is: The breakdown of organic matter in soil is acidic in nature, forming more acid compounds as a result. Leaching out of nitrogen in soil also causes some acidity. High nitrogen fertilizers which are ammonia based can also make soil more acid. Aluminum comes into play in determining the color of hydrangeas. Acidic soil forms acidic aluminum salts which express the color blue. Like litmus paper. Aluminum hydroxide forms in basic soils and produces a pink color in the flower. Please forgive the boring stuff. Giving fertilizer for acid loving plants to roses does help the soil to acidify in my garden, and really helps the chlorosis problem of roses that don't like alkaline soils. But it's an ongoing process because it doesn't permanently change the pH of the soil. So every year my roses get a does of this fertilizer in early spring. I'm not very concerned about soil pH if the roses are doing well. Diane