I actually like roses that sucker. I order from Pickering because I like THEM and want to show my support. But I was hesitant to try their roses after hearing that multiflora rootstock doesn't like alkaline conditions. However, I have had absolutely no issues with any of my roses on multiflora, even with both alkaline soil and water. So there must be something else I have or don't have/do that is different than say Jeri has/does that accounts for why roses on multiflora (or with its genes) do so well for me. Pickering hasn't updated their website about using laxa as a rootstock. I called last year to ask which of the roses I bought from them were on laxa and which on multiflora. The lady who I spoke with said none of the roses I bought from them were on laxa as they hadn't grafted anything on it (for I forget how many years she said). I expected that some were on laxa (and thought maybe that was why they were so happy in my garden), including the gallica Aimable Rouge, the damasks Duc de Cambridge and Pickering Four Seasons, the spinosissma William's Double Yellow, and the rugosas Wild Edric and Polareis. Not only are they not chlorotic but also Wild Edric (not even fed) and William's Double Yellow have particularly deep green foliage. Melissa

This is an interesting subject I have spend a lot of time and energy on, and I really like hearing others opinon :-) I wish some of the large rose producers would give us their knowlege or that someone does a large scale test of rootstocks in differnt locations that last at least 6 years. Kordes, Meilland and others must have lots of experience in this, not to mention nurseries in US. There are some old tests (1940's and 50's) that lasted 7 years or so, with field grown roses where the grafted roses did much better than any ownroot. For Europe north of the Alps three roses as rootstock came out better than others: Laxa, multiflora and a few canina varieties. Personally I have grown and observed alba roses like Minette, Maiden's Blush, Felicite Parmentier both as grafted plants and grown from rooted cuttings. In most cases all the grafed ones are larger even after something like 30-50 years (I have only planted roses the last 10 years). They say a grafed rose live on average something like 5 years, but some varieties really grow old as grafted plants. Maiden's Blush and Felicite Parmentier does not sucker much, if at all. Most likely it is the canina understock that is the root of these plants.These varieties are well worth growing ownroot and have vigour and resilience enough to stand on their ownfeet almost any where. In the rosarium in my town they grow a lot of rugosas, many of them really don't need any help from canina roots, or any other. Still they often are produced as grafted plants. I think it was Fru Dagmar Hastrup that was bought and planted on canina roots and did fine on them for a long time. Something like 6 years later they dug the plants up, sawed of the rootstock that still was the main root on all plants. This was done as an experiment and in hope that the plant would not grow as tall. They got the desired result, about 50 cm (just under two feet) shorter. The plants looked just as good on canina roots as ownroot. What I find interesting here it the fact that these rugosas do very well ownroot and really have no problem with the climate in any way. It seams that the understock gives the plant extra growth and energy. I have noticed this with climbers too, New Dawn, Blaze and a few climbing hybrid teas. They grow taller no doubt, and often look healthier and more resilient than ownroot plants. Floribundas and hybrid teas are even more dependent on streangth from the rootstock, and mostly there are no contest at all between ownroot and grafted. Pots seam to be the exeption and with extra care some grow into fine plants. I have read that multiflora does better in pots than other rootstocks. I have not had the chance to test this out, but multiflora does very well in pots. One of the arguments of those who produce ownroot roses is that grafted roses is less costly and done with less laber. This is not true. There was a time when grafting roses was considered both more expensive and more work, but the end result was found better. Another argument is that ownroot plants often look better in the garden and often will grow more shapely. This is not true either, I state this with observations from both the south of France and Northern Europe. A very long time ago grafting of roses was done with different techniques (in the time of Gertrude Jekyll). I don't know of any roses that is many with any other method than "oculation" (I don't know if this is the right term in English): Where a tiny T-shaped cut is made on the root-neck of the rootstock and an eye from the disired rose is slided under the fresh bark in the T-shaped cut. The root-stock is slightly pulled up from the soil, for the neck of the root to be exposed. This gives the plants by far much the same shape as a rose grown on its own roots. The budding point is not easily detected and the plants are not more leggy than ownroots. I dare state that there is no difference is shape even when grown right next to an ownroot rose of the same variety. After making such a rant about this, I have to mention that I happily rot cuttings of almost any rose :-)

Hi Saki Glad these comments were helpful, and we're always eager to help a beginning rose grower feel confident with their roses. The photo you posted is a lovely and very mature specimen of what looks like two or maybe even 3 climbing roses all splayed out horizontally along the fence. You can see one "fan" of canes spreading out from just right of center and another fan spreading from the left 1/3 of the photo. I can't tell if the cane stretching straight up in the center is part of a third plant with a few lateral canes or not. This effect is definitely a great thing to strive for, but I'd be totally depressed if I tried to get all my climbers to look like this, since not all climbers put out as many primary canes coming straight out of the soil as this one does. I'll show you two contrasting climbers for example. Colette looks the most like the photo above with several canes coming straight out of the soil that I'm encouraging sideways on my fence. Do remember that climbing roses have to be secured in some way to the fence - they won't climb on their own like clematis or other vines will. Mine is probably 3 years old, and you can see that it has three main canes out of the soil (I usually call them primary canes in a climber, but they come out of the base and I presume the terms are the same thing). Mine is own-root so there isn't a graft from which these canes split off, but if I'd buried my graft the 2-4" that is recommended in cold zones, it would look a lot like this too. Now, the reason you distinguish between primary canes and laterals in a climber, is that your blooms aren't mostly going to be directly on those primary canes that you bend sideways. Even in a young climber like this, you can see that the blooms are in smaller off-shoot canes that branch off vertically from these horizontal main canes - we call these lateral canes. The main/primary canes are toward the bottom of the fence, but the blooming laterals stretch up a good 2-3' higher than the primary canes. The more horizontal you can stretch your canes, the more likely the rose will put out laterals all the way along the length of those primary canes. That means you can have a fence full of blooms from only a few primary canes, even if the rose puts out a limited "fan" of canes. As Colette ages, she might put out more base canes, but I doubt I'd get the rich "forest" of canes in the photo above even when she's mature - particularly in any climbers that lose cane over the winter. Still, I'm confident she'll fill this part of the fence in another 2 years or so. Here's another rose that for me grows in a somewhat different habit. I've only seen one primary cane off the base of my Lunar Mist, and it's more like 4-5 years old. I bend it sideways in the same way as I do the Colette above, and it sends up laterals all along the length. Same principles of laterals and primary canes as above, it's just that the base of the rose is at one end of the array and the blooms arch off to one side off the primary cane that I've bent sideways. You can't quite see the base of Lunar Mist here, but it's off to the right and below the picture here, below where the clematis is. My New Dawn never got mature in the poor location under my oak tree, and we'll see what the new grafted version wants to do now, but at the moment it just has one big cane that I've stretched sideways like the Lunar Mist above. Climbers are very different when young vs. when mature, though, so you have to be patient with them. It usually takes at least 4-5 years before a climber has built up enough root structure to support a robust blooming rose, and not all of them will build this kind of fan structure very widely. Some will be more of a "rainbow" like my Lunar Mist. Regardless, the principle is the same and we encourage more growth of canes from the base in climbers as we do in any rose, with adequate water, maybe some alfalfa to encourage basal breaks, and patience, patience, patience. The rose will "tell" you what it wants to do over time. Just be sure to bend the young canes sideways when it's young, as robust climbers like New Dawn can get pretty stiff and woody in their primary canes over time, and they're much harder to bend. Hope that helps. Cynthia

When I was browsing Heirlooms site, my impression was they were very anti-graft, but I also sorta concluded because they were primarily selling own root , there was some slight bias. Upon stumbling across the videos trying to see how shrubs look when grown, my initial concerns about own root were very clear when looking at how the ~many canes~ vs the grafted/budded/formed cane framework. "can be worth a try, but you might want to see if you could get an own-root and a grafted plant of the same variety to try them together and see if there really is a difference where you are. Good luck with whatever you decide" That sounds like a 3-4 year test minimum like most shrubs. Settle in on the 1st year, and then by year 3, they really take off. I've got a boxwood hedge that I chose knowing it grows 1-2" per year. It's like watching paint dry each year. At this point in my life, I'm all about the instant gratification, albit gardening is teaching me patience. When buying certain shrubs, I'm buying the largest G I am willing to pay for the size. My order is in with DA already and most of them are grafted. I might take some cuttings down the road to observe my own-root curiosity, but many have said the grafted will take off faster, and quite frankly, as much as I think I like the framework more of own-root, I'd rather have growth.