Viewing post #971291 by woofie

You are viewing a single post made by woofie in the thread called Regarding roses and their thorns.
Image
Oct 17, 2015 4:16 PM CST
Name: woofie
NE WA (Zone 5a)
Charter ATP Member Garden Procrastinator Greenhouse Dragonflies Plays in the sandbox I was one of the first 300 contributors to the plant database!
The WITWIT Badge I helped plan and beta test the plant database. Dog Lover Enjoys or suffers cold winters Container Gardener Seed Starter
I'll be the first to admit that I know next to nothing about roses, except that they're pretty, they smell good and I like them. So perhaps for those who are knowledgeable, it's inherent in the type of rose as to whether or not any given rose has few to no thorns, is relatively prickly, or is so laden with thorns as to require chain mail to approach (why, yes, I did make the mistake of planting a Polareis in a spot that requires a bit of grooming. Which does not happen for reasons obvious to anyone familiar with that rose. Rolling my eyes. )
Would it be redundant to add a field to the roses database to indicate that a particular rose is "heavily thorned," as opposed to just "thorned" or "thornless or almost thornless?"
Confidence is that feeling you have right before you do something really stupid.

« Return to the thread "Regarding roses and their thorns"
« Return to Plant Database forum
« Return to the Garden.org homepage

Member Login:

( No account? Join now! )

Today's site banner is by Murky and is called "Pink and Yellow Tulips"

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.