I just received an email from Gregg at Vintage that contained corrections to his earlier article that many of us happily gulped up. Apparently, the thought of not pruning our bushes at all was very appealing, but was NOT exactly the method that had been so successful in the study he quoted afterall. Read more to find out about the corrections:
Subject: RNRS Pruning Trials-Important Corrections to my Report
Date: 1/22/2009 3:38:58 PM Central Standard Time
From: [email protected]
RNRS Pruning Trials—Important Corrections to my Report
In our December newsletter I reported on the trials of the Royal National Rose Society where the results of three methods of pruning roses were studied. It was brought gently to my attention by friends in England that I didn’t quite get it right. I offer most humble apologies, particularly to those who may have felt justified in never pruning their roses.
RNRS Pruning Trials
The error in my report had to do with the third pruning method, which I characterized as a group that was NOT pruned. In fact this group of roses WAS pruned in a fashion described as ‘rough pruning.’ The roses in these blocks were in fact cut back roughly, by hand pruning to shorten the plants. They were not thinned, no deadwood was removed, and the cuts were made without regard to the location of growth buds, or to the angle of the cuts.
Both the ‘rough pruned’ and hedge-trimmer pruned roses scored higher in the initial evaluations than the roses pruned in the traditional method, where plants were thinned, and opened up in the centers. In particular it was noted that these two groups resulted in plants that produced ‘stronger growth…and in many cases, better flowering performance than traditional pruning.
I have received many letters from those of you who agree with my notion that leaving plants un-pruned gives them a better chance to develop naturally and more strongly than roses that are regularly thinned and diminished in size. This notion is one that I have arrived at after many, many years of growing thousands of rose cultivars. It first occurred to me when I observed untended roses in cemeteries that had not been pruned. Those plants thrived with little or no care, no summer water, and often seemed to outshine most of my own carefully controlled plants.
In the mid-1990s I began leaving sections of my own garden un-pruned every second year. The plants spent this two year period bulking up, filling in, and the bloom display in the second year after pruning was always more spectacular. I have continued to apply this treatment to most of the Old European roses, the Bourbons, HPs, Noisettes, Teas and Chinas, which have room to grow in their plantings. Because I have crowded the HTs and Floribundas in the traditional beds they occupy in my garden, I find it necessary to prune them yearly in order to prevent more vigorous varieties from swamping and setting back weaker, slower growers. I continue to be convinced that our major purpose for pruning is to size down plants. I believe that the traditional justifications for pruning that suggest this intervention helps the plants, making them better bloomers and healthier plants, is baseless.
Sizing down plants is not however a misguided activity. Usually we plant a rose with only a vague idea of how big it will get. And many roses, particularly in our mild climate in California, achieve dimensions that are difficult to provide for, especially in a small garden. At the Chambersville Rose Garden in Texas, which the Heritage Rose Foundation has proclaimed as a study plot for old roses that thrive in the North Texas climate, Teas and Chinas have been planted with ample room to grow to their full potential. Each year that they increase in size they grow more vigorously and bloom more profusely.
The Art of Pruning—the Art of Gardening
But not all gardens can spread over acres to give roses their full spread. Gardens like Mottisfont Abbey in England have been planted in much more compact conditions. Graham Thomas’ design for Mottisfont intended for the old shrub roses to grow large and full, making stolid shrubs and arching fountains. Yet, maintaining the balance between the competing inhabitants of this garden, roses and perennials alike, calls for a careful management of the plants, and pruning is an integral part of that. Gardeners who have an opportunity to manage such plantings learn a great deal about each plant, its needs, its tolerance of pruning and what sort of pruning it requires. The skill and accumulated knowledge that they apply results in a garden that, in full bloom, appears rich and full, blowsy and carefree, as though the plants are scarcely touched.
We prune roses to control their size, but more importantly we control their size as a sculptor trims and models her clay. A garden is a vision that exists in our minds. We work tirelessly to reveal that vision in three dimensions, with all of the unpredictability of the living things that are our clay and paints. We may never arrive at the moment that our creation matches our vision, but even if that moment arrives it is gone the next moment, never to return. That is the art of gardening, and pruning, for better or worse, is one of those techniques we strive to master for the sake of our art.
Beware the Easy Fix
Leaving your roses un-pruned may or may not achieve the beauty you seek in your garden creation. Trimming with hedge-trimmers may or may not decrease your work in the rose garden. Jon Dodson of Mottisfont Abbey recently shared with me a letter from the August 2007 issue of The Garden, Journal of the Royal Horticultural Society, written by David Bartlett, who had worked at the RNRS gardens on the pruning trials in the 1990s. He was addressing an article by Charles Quest-Ritson in the March issue in which Quest-Ritson asserted that ‘a rough clip with hedge-trimmers gives better results than traditional pruning methods.’ Bartlett takes issue with the reported results of the trials—he himself had both pruned and gathered observational data—and notably says that the hedge-trimmer pruning took longer; ‘…it took a great deal of back-breaking labour to clear up the cuttings.’ One can easily imagine trying to disentangle the pruned tips that had fallen head first into the plants, thorns locked to thorns. He also indicates that the hedge-pruned roses developed more disease in subsequent years and that the disease spread to all of the roses—the result, weakened plants that had eventually all to be removed and replaced.
At the Huntington Gardens in California a new trial has just been announced by rose curator Clair Martin; ‘we are using power hedge shears on the large beds of shrub roses like the yellow 'Sun Flare' in front of the Rose Garden Tea Room…’ With characteristic humor, Clair suggests that you may think he’s lost his mind! His hope is that this will speed the process and produce improved bloom. You may be curious, as I am, to follow the results. If so, log on to the Huntington website and read more… We still have much to learn, though I hope that my errors of reporting have not brought on an experiment that may be fraught with ills.
To read one of the reports on the RNRS trials online, go to the website of Paul Barden, Old Garden Roses and Beyond (www.rdrop.com) where Paul has reprinted Pruning Roses with Hedgetrimmers, by past RNRS President, Ken Grapes. While you’re there, get inspired by Paul’s breathtaking rose hybrids, which combine some of the best qualities of old and modern roses.
***Correction to the Vintage pruning guide*** (email)