This Forum will close on Wednesday 27 March, 2024. Please refer to the announcement on the Discussions page for further detail.
Iceberg climbing rose
in Plants
Hi @Nollie rather than clog the rose thread with a long post, I've started a new thread.
This is one of the photos I sent to David Austin. I specifically asked about the lack of new basal canes, and whether the green canes visible were just laterals; and if the climbing version could `revert` to the floribunda.

A chap from DA phoned me (didn't catch his name, as I was taken unawares), which was good, as I could ask questions. He said:
He kindly offered to send a replacement, which I politely declined - no point going back to square one. I will give it one more season, and see what happens. Otherwise, I will replace it with a non-rose.
I know there are people on here who have Iceberg climbers and have commented on how spectacular and successful they are. I would love to hear from them about its growing form, and how long it took to really develop. @Marlorena I try very hard not to pester you with my stupid rose questions, but if you have any views/advice, I would welcome the input!
Apologies for the long essay.
This is one of the photos I sent to David Austin. I specifically asked about the lack of new basal canes, and whether the green canes visible were just laterals; and if the climbing version could `revert` to the floribunda.

A chap from DA phoned me (didn't catch his name, as I was taken unawares), which was good, as I could ask questions. He said:
- He would not expect new basal canes - the canes I had were exactly what he would expect. I challenged this, and said I had seen examples online of people's climbing roses producing 6-8ft climbing canes, not 2-3ft. His response was `yes, ramblers, maybe` but that the canes I had would continue to grow, and I should continue to train them as horizontally as possible.
- He felt that the rose was showing climbing characteristics and had not reverted.
- He said that the rose was about where he would expect for the start of its third season (ie about 3ft high), and that it should start to take off now. I said I was surprised it was described as fast-growing and vigorous in that case! He said climbers take much longer to develop than shrubs.
He kindly offered to send a replacement, which I politely declined - no point going back to square one. I will give it one more season, and see what happens. Otherwise, I will replace it with a non-rose.
I know there are people on here who have Iceberg climbers and have commented on how spectacular and successful they are. I would love to hear from them about its growing form, and how long it took to really develop. @Marlorena I try very hard not to pester you with my stupid rose questions, but if you have any views/advice, I would welcome the input!
Apologies for the long essay.
0
Posts
Just went out to check. It just grows from one main stem. Branches from about six inches up the stem. Nothing else comes out of the ground ( is that what basal canes are?)
.heya... Austin's is right about some of what they say but I will disagree here and claim that your rose has reverted to bush form, I see nothing remotely climbing about it, and seemingly with no intention to do so.. perhaps they should review one of the late Mr Austin's many rose books where he wrote himself that ''has a tendency to revert to bush form''..
I have grown clg. Iceberg once before in a garden in Kent. By the 4th year I would say, it was around 6-8 feet tall by as much across... it does extend itself upwards from its framework, which is why light pruning is advised, but I never saw it produce basals, because it's not a true climber ..
Claims of 15 feet is generous in this country, perhaps against a wall.
If you want to try another I recommend the clone sold by Peter Beales. Then again, my neighbour has a magnificent specimen which flowers all summer and he keeps it about 6-8 feet. Can you believe he got it from Aldi.. ?..
No problem with questions, don't ever worry about that... my worry is that I might not always be able to answer them, but then somebody else can... as we see on this thread..