During the history of roses there have been "big" rose breeders. Names like Jean-Pierre Vibert, Meilland, Kordes, Moore, Carruth, Austin and Radler are fairly recognizable to people growing roses. I was listening to someone talking about breeding roses and the person said that "you aren't going to be the next David Austin..." and it got me thinking why not?
I once read a statement from a rose breeder, I don't remember whom, that replied along the lines of something like, those were the roses I had available, when asked why they used those roses. This breeder was a "big" name in the rose world. If the "big breeders" use what they have available, why can I or anyone else?
I think that beyond just starting, one needs to have some direction or end goal in mind when breeding roses. If you read the writings of David Austin, his end goal (summarized) was to combine the best of the Old Garden Roses with the existing Modern Garden Roses.
Why can't the next big breeder have their goal be something like climate appropriate roses that have the looks of roses that aren't climate appropriate. For example, in my zone 5b/6a yard, breeding a color changing single rose that starts yellow and fades to pink (similar to Mutabilis) that repeats, but is Hardy and won't die in negative weather. Or on the other extreme, someone in a zone 7 or 8 breeding a repeat (not necessarily, but would probably be a better received plant) fully double, quartered mauve with resinous buds (similar to Charles de Mills)that doesn't have to have a winter in order to flower so that warmer climates could have the European old garden rose look?
What if the starting point of a cold hardy Tea rose is a gardener who has available to them Father Hugo's Rose and Duchesse de Brabant? Like wise a warm season gallica the gardener has Tuscany Superb and Abraham Darby available to use?
I say, try with what you have and see what happens. One may never know what will happen and who knows where the next "big" breeder will come from.
