I just wanted to first introduce myself. I’m a newbie gardener from the San Francisco bay area and just recently gotten into roses in the last couple of years. I have only a small collection of roses (mostly floribundas) but hope to play around with hybridizing them in the near future when they get more established.
Most of my roses are well documented on HMF but I can’t seem to find any information on ‘Ultra Violet’ Simplicity. This the first full year I’ve had it and it’s setting hips like no one’s business without my help. I don’t remember it setting hips like this last year. I was just wondering if anyone has information about this variety as well as any advice or tips. Thanks in advance!
Welcome! Googling the name, I found this page of the Jackson and Perkins rose site for that rose. Ultra Violet Simplicity Hedge Rose | Jackson & Perkins It lists the code name of the rose as Jaccity, which is not listed on HMF. That isn’t unusual since the bankruptcy sale of J&P a few years ago. While code names had traditionally been generated for specific varieties and registered with the variety, the “new” J&P seems to push them out like “stuff” through a goose with no documentation of them anywhere. The site says it was introduced in 2019, so I searched Jackson and Perkins on HMF for 2019 introductions and BINGO! 'Ultra Violet Simplcity' Rose Ultra Violet Simplicity. I’ve added the JACcity to the page in hopes it may help find it again if needed. Good luck!
Thanks for creating the page. I’ll add to it as I gather more images and find more about my plant.
You’re welcome, but I didn’t create the page. It was already there. I simply added the Jaccity to it. Evidently you were combining Ultra and violet or something so it wouldn’t find it in the database, but the page was already there. Thank you for adding photos and information about the rose. All of that was originally taken from the official ARS registration information when the roses were registered with the ARS. The “new” J&P does none of that so they just generate the code names, put the rose with its sketchy information out on their sales page and if it never appears again, nothing is known about it. When the database information came from the printed ARS registrations, there was always a verifiable source of the information. With so much of it now simply web pages, they disappear and you’re left with a broken link to no where.
I wonder if it might not be better to first add web pages to the Internet Archive/Wayback Machine, and then link from HMF to the pages archived on that site instead. That might be better and more stable than using only an original link for web pages, especially in some cases where the original is particularly likely to be short-lived.
It likely would. Traditionally, HMF ONLY added information from official ARS registrations or from the breeders. As fewer and fewer roses were being registered and more and more site users flooding the Comments section with complaints about missing plants, that, unfortunately, has morphed into the current sourcing of information. If someone wishes to take on the adding of nursery catalog listing web pages to the Wayback Machine for this purpose, that would be great. You have to remember that ALL work on HMF is accomplished by a small group of volunteers. Adding something like this to the tasks they have graciously agreed to accomplish when ideally it would be up to the selling/introducing nursery, is a lot to expect.
It might be possible to just ask any HMF users who provide links to web pages in the future to please instead provide links to pages that have been archived. It’s pretty simple to do and just takes a couple of extra steps, even if the pages weren’t already available in archived form. It would be worth those small individual efforts to help protect the collective information from the growing scourge of broken links–not just the direct links on HMF, but the data contained on those pages are also be more likely to be preserved that way.
I would think that most folks who care enough to submit information to HMF would also like to see it insured against sudden loss, especially since the cost of that insurance is practically just a few extra clicks. A gentle boilerplate prompt/reminder (maybe a page with simple instructions, in case anyone is confused) might be all that it would take to start getting at least some users on board. I’m sure that it isn’t a perfect solution, and a subset of users might not be willing to take any extra steps, but maybe it would be worth at least a small trial run if it doesn’t take too much time or effort to do.
The latter Simplicity roses were mostly mini and flori parents, and honestly reduced in resistances. The original set were kind of like Iceberg types.
Based on Zary’s other work, it probably has Herbie, Shocking Blue, and Sweet Chariot in it.
Whatever you do, consider crossing it with much shorter roses. The stem length per cluster on the latter Simplicity roses in nutty.