>I'm hoping to plant 3 new roses against our wooden fence and they would get the afternoon sun, facing west. Would this be a good location for them? Also, we planted an 8 foot flowering cherry tree about 6 feet in front of that spot. I know they are fast growers (it's not the weeping kind, it's a prunus kanzan) but the foliage isn't much to speak about for now and probably won't provide much shade for years. Hi Natanya, It probably mostly depends on whether you already have the roses or not, and if so, which varieties you chose. Probably hybrid teas wouldn't work because they mostly need more sun than that, and many wouldn't get tall enough to discount the shading effects of the fence. If your rose variety can grow tall enough, the influence of the facing direction won't matter much; which direction of exposure a larger and taller-growing rose gets next to a fence isn't as important as which exposure it might have next to a (much taller) house. Disease resistance and shade tolerance in getting to that taller condition would be things to consider, though. If you have bought or can choose to buy now a longer/larger-growing rose variety/varieties that are reasonably disease resistant and that can also take a bit of shade, even a little bit, by the time it gets to the top of the fence, it will effectively be growing in full sun--if it's not directly in a northerly line with the flowering cherry you planted to the west of your west-facing fence. Most roses can take full sun, though not all. If you haven't bought/chosen the rose variety yet, consider something like a hardy Cornelia (or another hybrid musk hardy in your area). Cornelia can take a good bit of shade, and will do well in full all-day sun too. Lyda Rose would work beautifully there too. (Don't go by what just a single bloom of Lyda Rose looks like when estimating its impact; it's spectacular as a whole large plant gets covered in blooms with a faint lavendar pink edging to each petal.) Some shade-tolerant climbers might also work well to climb on your fence: Annie Laurie McDowell, Renae, Climbing Pinkie, Cile Brunner. Many of the hybrid musks can serve well as climbers too, and many of them would be hardy there. If a taller or larger-growing rose doesn't appeal to you, the hardy (and wonderful!) florabunda Grüss An Aachen would work, and it starts blooming early enough that it might well have blooms at the same time as your new cherry tree. The floribundas Iceberg/Brilliant Pink Iceberg/Burgandy Iceberg ought to work too (and likely blooming with your cherry tree), and Snow Gosling would look good too. Many lower-growing polyanthas might fit the bill: Marie Daley, Marie Pavie, Baby Faraux, Lovely Fairy, Lullabye, The Gift, Cécile Brunner. If you go with these smaller (disease-resistant) roses, I don't think they'd look good if you plant them two feet out. Maybe 15-18 inches--even taking into account some horizontal growth. Another thing to consider: if you go with smaller roses, you will probably need more of them than just three if the intention is to create a line of color all along the fence. Best wishes, Mary

>I hear everyone say facing East is good for roses, morning sun, etc... but the only place I have available facing east get very little sun because there are mature maple and oak trees 30-40 feet away and very very tall that block most of the sun. (da*n patio takes up most facing east spots) So, should I try it? Or it's not worth it b/c it won't be enough sun. If you have some south-facing spots with fewer trees to the south of them, those would be better. Or any spots with more sun would be better for the majority of roses. But those of us with woodsy yards do take what we can get! Try measuring the number of hours/minutes of sun you get on a sunny day in those spots. Bear in mind that even 18 inches farther to one side or another might be different, so you'll need to keep some records of what you see. Maybe creating some markers on the ground for every three feet, and keep a record over a bunch of days (since you can't easily check every 2 minutes), using some estimates where you have to. Sometimes ten minutes at a time is all you get for one liitle spot of sun as the sun moves in its arc. I have seen a "Luster Leaf 1875 Rapitest Suncalc Sunlight Calculator" at Amazon. I've no idea how it works, or how well it works. If you tried that and came to vastly different conclusions from your own detailed observations, it's probably better to trust your own observations. Another thing to factor in here is how bright it might be when in the "shade." If a rose is in the shadow of a house, for example, the shade is darker than one that's in the shade of trees not directly overhead; that rose can be in a little brighter spot because of all the little patches of light filtering through a few spots in the trees every here and there and affecting the general brightness of the area even when the rose isn't getting direct light. And finally, the deciduous trees you have that lose their leaves also gives you a boost in the early spring, where your roses would probably get 80-90 percent of full sun for awhile, and this is a part of the time when the rose is starting its spring growth and forming buds for the first flush. Of course, the earlier blooming roses can take better advantage of this fact than those not blooming in their first flush until long, long after the leaves have grown to full size on the trees. For the most part, though, your question isn't answerable to a highly useful degree in its present form. The main answer is "It depends on how much sunlight the roses would have." If you have fewer than 2 hours of direct sun, then many of the postings you see about roses doing well in partial shade won't apply to your situation. Some people even think that 6 hours of sun isn't full sun (since obviously there are more potential hours of sunlight during the summer than that). So for some, a rose that will do well with only 5 hours of sunlight is shade tolerant. Your situation doesn't sound like 5 hours of sunlight to me, though you ought to measure to pin it down. And it's easy to get advice based on knowing how much better almost all roses will do with more sun, not less... and not want to steer you towards a potential disappointment. On the other hand, if the idea is to help you find what stands a reasonably good chance of doing well in really reduced direct sunlight, it's too bad that the sources of information and most posters tend to refer, at least by inference, to a spot with more sunlight that what you might have. The four sources of information that tend to be more helpful than others in my experience (though not perfect either) are: 1. A Woodland Rose Garden (online): http://www.woodlandrosegarden.com/rose/shade1.htm 2. The above site mentions Peter Beales' website, but not Peter Beales' book, "Classic Roses." I'd highly recommend the book because it mentions not only roses that will take some shade but those that he thinks will take enough to plant them on the north side of the house. You can sometimes buy used copies/earlier editions at Amazon for not too much money, though if you can afford it, buy the latest edition. (It's a wonderful book in lots of ways. You have to keep clicking on the webpages that come up from the search to discover the older, cheaper versions.) 3. Buy the Vintage Gardens' catalog. http://www.vintagegardens.com/catalogs_purchase.aspx Gregg Lowery, the author, has an appendix in it that lists the shade tolerant roses that he says he has personally tried in 3 or fewer hours of direct sunlight and had success with. He notes that there are some roses that others think of as shade tolerant but he doesn't think you can have success with them in that little light. It's a pretty lengthy list, and you want to have it. I ended up eliminating an order for Madame Alfred Carriere from a spot fairly similar to yours, based on its noticeable absence from Gregg's list. (I ordered a climbing Iceberg instead.) I'd also been thinking of Lamarque also because of its well-known shade tolerance, but it was missing from Gregg's list too. (Lots of noisettes did make the list, just not those two.) Vintage Gardens carries a ton of varieties, but not all. Clearly if Gregg doesn't have a rose or have any personal experience with it, he won't mention it on his list... so check to see whether Vintage Gardens carries the variety before eliminating something you want based on his list. Gregg doesn't mention Lyda Rose on his good shade tolerance list, but Vintage doesn't carry that rose either. The Vintage Gardens catalog is wonderful in lots of ways. You won't regret spending the money to get it. 4. As long as you are investigating shade tolerance, another book that mentions it by breaking it down some to degree is Liz Druitt's book, "The Organic Rose Garden." And another organically oriented one that systematically mentions shade tolerance is "Creating Beautiful Roses" by Barbara Wilde. 5. The Rogue Valley Roses website is an especially good one for indicating shade tolerance by degree. You can search on "very shade tolerant" with the shade variable under their Advanced Search click on the page left... and wind up looking at a very short list of 12 roses, all of which might be suitable for trying with only one hour of sun or dappled sunlight. (Example: their "New Face" looks as if it might work.) With "shade tolerant" chosen, the list results in 197 rose varieties. http://www.roguevalleyroses.com/advanced_search.php The Antique Rose Emporium site also mentions shade tolerance... and as far as I can tell, they don't mention any on that list that don't have pretty good shade tolerance. (Personal guess: if the rose needs a full 5 hours of sun, it doesn't appear on the Antique Rose Emporium's shade tolerant list.) http://www.antiqueroseemporium.com/partialshade.html If you have less than one hour of direct sun, figure on using some Albas (maybe) and a very few other roses that you can find more than one person saying the rose is more than just a little bit shade tolerant. I've seen Lyda Rose described that way by more than one person--will survive and bloom even in just bright light. (And single-flowered bloomers tend to stand a better chance in this respect too.) Anyway, Gregg's list would be a good place to start... and then investigate others' online comments on Gregg's list roses for relevance to really, really limited direct sunlight. Add anything you find where people are claiming a rose that will stay reasonably healthy and bloom some even in less than one hour of sunlight in deciduous woods. Bubble Bath and Kiftsgate might meet that expectation too, as well as most albas (like Madame Plantier that some people have boasted about online in reference to how well it does in the shade of decidous trees). Ghislaine De Feligonde *might* work, though I'm not at all sure about that. With two or three hours of sun, you could add in Grs An Aachen, though don't expect it to be covered with blooms the way it would be in full sun or nearly full sun. My three Grüss An Aachens were constantly in bloom under those conditions last year, though usually with only one or two blooms per plant. Healthy, but not without a little blackspot now and then. Once you get your new books and look through the Woodland Garden sites and the nursery sites, you ought to be able to add in a few more possibilities. Some of the other hybrid musks might work too, but not all. Cornelia and Belinda would be good bets. A good many polyanthas might work too, including Marie Daly and Marie Pavie. With four or five hours of morning sun, any rose that's claimed in any source to have some shade tolerance will probably work and some that aren't mentioned too (a particular floribunda here, for instance). Look for good disease tolerance at the same time you look for shade tolerance, since there will be more fungus pressure in shadier conditions. The same books good for researching shade tolerance are especially good resources for helping to choose disease resistant plants too. Best of luck! Mary

Benjamin Moore Oklahoma Wheat Sherwin Williams Sawdust BM Dry Sage I have east-west facing great room/DR combination and I have used BM OK Wheat which is the best color I have used there. I have SW Sawdust in an east/west bedroom/bathroom which works well. I have used BM Dry Sage in East-West facing kitchen with oak cabinets which was the best color I used there. I have purchase iceberg most recently for my GR/DR combination but have not painted yet. I will paint it and evaluate it. I do like fall/spring colors. I like the colors of a lion's coat or leaves with a yellow color. I do not like the emerald colors or blue royals for oak companions. It is too hard. I think the grays are too blah. I like the colors of nature but then I can mix accessory colors to create a pallet of beautiful colors. The wall color is not everything but oak and west/east north/south directions can dictate what the main color must be. I also do not think taupe plays well with oak. For me, it was like a mistake trying to be corrected. I think some ocean aquas could be good, but I have not yet done that. Olives and avocados do well with oaks. They are a natural. imento accents make for a beautiful vignette. Nothing prettier than a spattering of the right color of red with the greens of fall or evergreen in winter. Because of the situation of my house, most of my rooms open east/west on one side while on the other side, they are north or south or north/south.

I have anthurium, very easy to care for. Its planted in Al’s “5-1-1” mix, which is 5 parts pine bark to one part sifted peat & 1part sifted, coarse grade perlite. I water about 2-3x/wk in summer, depending on temps & fertilize weakly, weekly. (1/4 tsp per gal.) I keep this plant East-facing but underneath another plant on a 2-tiered plant stand, which is parked under a large but somewhat open-canopied maple tree so the anthurium gets bright but shaded morning/early afternoon sun. This plant blooms religiously for me every August. It comes from the South American rainforest, so bright, filtered sun; high humidity & frequent watering are what it needs. I bring it back inside each fall late in season, when temps hit around 40F at night & send it back outside in spring when temps are 50+ at night. Don’t want to shock it after 5 months of consistent 70-75F indoor tmps. Also, there are a few Oxalis bulbs that mysteriously found their way into this pot (Idk how?) but I felt sorry for the little orphans so I let them stay. They seem to like the care, so my pot of Oxalis gets the same treatment, but w/o other plant on top, so it gets a bit more sun. This plant has also been a reliable, season-long bloomer & easy to care for, so oxalis may be another easy option for you, should you want to have more than one plant. It’s deep burgundy leaves & delicate whitish/pinkish flowers add a lot of color to a room. Hope this helps.