Thank you for your response, Kate. I learned about Queen Anne rose from my 2014 David Austin catalog (15th USA Edition), so that's how I know that she is available here. I have considered the beautiful Princess Anne rose, which you suggested, but have read, on a thread or two, that she is "uber thorny", as opposed to Queen Anne and Queen of Sweden, who have few thorns. I believe that I am ready to deal with a few thorns, but not with "uber thorny"! You made a good point about disease-resistance. When David Austin does not comment on the healthiness and disease-resistance of a particular rose, I have to wonder about it. However, I believe that all of the roses that he has bred, in very recent years, are probably healthier than many of those that he introduced years ago. If a rose is featured in the main collection of the current catalog, I feel that it is worthy for me to give it a try. Another pink rose that captures my attention is Lady Salisbury. I simply cannot resist the description and photo of her "matt" green leaves. (This is a description that D.A. seldom uses in his books and catalogs.) Foliage and growth style is every bit as important to me as the blooms. Thank you for your input on Queen of Sweden. She is very appealing to me! I have read many good things about her on this forum. : )

Do you guys think that this is one that would do better if we pinched back the new growth? I seem to remember a thread last year where Chris from Newflora discussed that technique. And Ken in GA talked about it too - pinching back the tips to encourage branching & flowering all up and down the plant. I might try it with mine this year - it blooms at the top of tall canes. I just have to remember to do it lol!

Personally I would not be worried or bother spraying - pretty minimal damage. You cannot expect every leave to be perfect!

Thank you, perma and pippa! Yes the bloom form I just couldn’t resist! Had to grow it, even if I knew there’s a chance I wouldn’t like the scent (heard myyrh is a love or hate thing).