Fuzzy stems, Take 2

I was recently at a garden where I saw Flamingo. I had only ever seen it in books before. First off, it was brilliantly beautiful, especially at this time of year. It had a color rare in rugosas (non-magenta shade of pink), the same silky petals, but with colorful stamens. I always assumed it was a small rugosa for some reason, but this one was huge, healthy and vigorous.

As I inspected it like any rose geek would do, I noticed that the stems were nearly identical to Linda Campbell’s. In fact, the growth and architecture was quite synonomous. But the stems are what intrigued me. Theyre just as fuzzy as Linda Campbell’s.

Why is this? Is it some sort of pubescence around normal rugosas that is hidden underneath the thorns that give it added elemental protection…or a result of genetics colliding? Whatever it is, it is absolutely good for the modern landscape since texture gives any garden an added 3D element.

I don’t recall Flamingo having fuzzy stems. Although, I only seen the spent flowers and got one lucky openly pollinated seed. It hasn’t sprouted and I doubt it will…

Linda Campbell is gorgeous, and I love the “fuzziness” of it. If thornless roses had this fuzziness, I would love to grow it. (If it had fragrant eglatine leaves… all the better.)

The openly pollinated seedling of Clinophylla and Bractateate has this fuzziness going on… but also many thorns.

My Flamingo is fuzzy. Beautiful rose. Seems completely infertile.

Has anyone here had any luck using Linda Campbell as a parent at all?