Thanks everyone for your lovely messages. I just had to make the most of my little career break so I went all out with the travelling..
One of the first tasks I did when I came back 3 weeks ago was to re-pot three of my container roses that I first potted up 5 years ago .. I was expecting fully formed foot balls but much to my surprise they weren’t - in fact the main root structure looked very similar to the bare root roses but with a lot more fine feeding roots growing out of them. Since these were some of my very first attempts at growing roses the pots were in fact much smaller than the recommended 18x18 inches - despite that the roses didn’t seem to have filled the entire pot over the course of 5 years. It makes me wonder if the 18x18in specification truly is necessary?
Nonetheless I am looking forward to these three freshly repotted roses as they have been my favourites (even though I do love each and every one of my roses).
I bought the Bolero rose and I can't get enough of the scent! It's still in its nursery pot for now, being toted around to various places until I decide where it best belongs. I'm not sure what has survived our unusually cold and wet winter so I may have unexpected gaps. We had torrential rain overnight, so I can assess balling damage in the coming days. It looks unaffected so far so I have high hopes!
@celcius_kkw - I had a small rose, Amber Queen, in a pot that was maybe 14 x 14 maximum. After one year (not even a full year) it was completely root/pot bound with a dense mat of roots and it was incredibly difficult to release it for planting in the ground.
Mary Delaney (then Mortimer Sackler) had been in a 62x56cm so roughly equivalent to 24x24” for a year, and while it was in no way bound like the Amber Queen had been, its root structure and feeder roots had reached the bottom of the pot. I had to remove a half to two thirds of the soil before I was happy that I’d removed the majority of the roots. This was so I could plant Desdemona in the same pot.
So your findings are interesting.
But I’d say as a general rule - you do want the largest pot you can get/fit in your space. Ive got three sizes of pot with 24”, 22”, 20”. But the 20” isn’t a bell pot it, struggling to describe it at this time in the morning, but due to the shape it has less volume that one with curvier sides. The roses in the other two pots certainly seem happier.
@Mr. Vine Eye The thing is two of these three roses of mine were the best performing roses on my balcony over the years - last year they seemed to fare a little worse and that prompted me to repot them this year thinking it could be down to them being root bound..
We’ve had really mild weather and continuous steady rain for a couple of days here, which is most welcome, the garden is looking and feeling refreshed. Forecast is for -5 and heavy snow tomorrow though 🥶. It may not happen since they often get it wrong, but I think I’ll dig out a couple of fleeces just in case..
New roses in the poly are doing well. I know it’s still February but interesting to see different growth rates. Racing ahead are Crépuscle, Roald Dahl and Violet Hood, most others are well on their way. Two remain stubbornly slow..
Marie Nabonnand has finally got some shoots, hurrah!
Indigo is the furthest behind, only just getting little red nubbles:
Mountainous Northern Catalunya, Spain. Hot summers, cold winters.
And hi and welcome back @celcius_kkw, that’s odd about the lack of roots. My experience with rootbound potted roses accords more with Mr. Vs, maybe you fed them so well they couldn’t be bothered putting out new roots!
Mountainous Northern Catalunya, Spain. Hot summers, cold winters.
My experience with potted ones were similar to Mr Vine eye's. Within a year the roots had reached the ground.. Probably soil/ compost used makes a difference..
It's very vigorous, I mean huge, very thorny and little scent according to anyone who has it... I long coveted that rose since I heard about it some years ago, but perhaps it was best I couldn't get hold of it..
Friends of Vintage should know better with the name though, it's 'Florence Bowers' Pink Tea'... she was Mrs Bowers, not Mrs Bower.. slight difference..
Lucky to have Bolero... I suspect its health might be suspect in our climate, but it would be good to find out..
..and I've just corrected my own grammatical mistake there.. lol..
Posts
One of the first tasks I did when I came back 3 weeks ago was to re-pot three of my container roses that I first potted up 5 years ago .. I was expecting fully formed foot balls but much to my surprise they weren’t - in fact the main root structure looked very similar to the bare root roses but with a lot more fine feeding roots growing out of them. Since these were some of my very first attempts at growing roses the pots were in fact much smaller than the recommended 18x18 inches - despite that the roses didn’t seem to have filled the entire pot over the course of 5 years. It makes me wonder if the 18x18in specification truly is necessary?
Mary Delaney (then Mortimer Sackler) had been in a 62x56cm so roughly equivalent to 24x24” for a year, and while it was in no way bound like the Amber Queen had been, its root structure and feeder roots had reached the bottom of the pot. I had to remove a half to two thirds of the soil before I was happy that I’d removed the majority of the roots. This was so I could plant Desdemona in the same pot.
So your findings are interesting.
But I’d say as a general rule - you do want the largest pot you can get/fit in your space.
Ive got three sizes of pot with 24”, 22”, 20”. But the 20” isn’t a bell pot it, struggling to describe it at this time in the morning, but due to the shape it has less volume that one with curvier sides. The roses in the other two pots certainly seem happier.
New roses in the poly are doing well. I know it’s still February but interesting to see different growth rates. Racing ahead are Crépuscle, Roald Dahl and Violet Hood, most others are well on their way. Two remain stubbornly slow..
Marie Nabonnand has finally got some shoots, hurrah!
Indigo is the furthest behind, only just getting little red nubbles:
Hurray! Vicariously delighted (if envious).
Social media keeps displaying all these other beauties available in the US. Facebook has this charming one today:
I suppose everywhere has its own good stuff, though!
Friends of Vintage should know better with the name though, it's 'Florence Bowers' Pink Tea'... she was Mrs Bowers, not Mrs Bower.. slight difference..
Lucky to have Bolero... I suspect its health might be suspect in our climate, but it would be good to find out..
..and I've just corrected my own grammatical mistake there.. lol..