Klavier: I just confirmed to myself that in fact the University of Minnesota Dept. of Horticultural Science (Chad P. Giblin), have in fact been performing screening of american elms. A magnificent specimen American elm that has been observed to be surviving a crown fire of ded for the past 35 or so years is now in the process of being cloned there. I read that part of their research involves grafting the St. Croix onto Valley Forge rootstock. I'm sure he would be more than glad to share with you some of their research as well.

I think VF is a National Arboretum introduction, so personal propagation should be permissable. hairmetal4ever: There seems to be some gap in the anthropomorphic logic. First, what you are describing is known as topophysis, where the location on a plant that the scion is taken from leads to the growth behavior of the rooted cutting (or graft). So, terminal cuttings from branches/stems exhibiting some apical dominance should root and behave like leaders. Terminal cuttings from side branches may well continue to behave like side branches after rooting. And so on. So - why would radically cutting the sideways-growing VF make any difference? The new shoots still emerge from the same rooted cutting. I'd suspect that they'd continue to behave the same way, but it would be a fun experiment to try out and prove something one way or another. "More than one poster who has a "Valley Forge" American elm has said that it is tought to establish a leader, since they are rooted from cuttings, that the tree still thinks it's a branch." This will only be true of plants derived from cuttings taken from lateral branches. It should NOT apply to cuttings taken from vertically-growing or from the leader(s) of the parent tree. Thusly, the old "caveat emptor" applies: Know what you are getting before it gets you. What you said about "every stump sprout you've ever seen is" refers to unadulterated trees (I'd wager), not rooted cuttings. I've whacked at more than a few grafted plants in my time. Above the graft, the plant behaves as expected. A particularly annoying pendulous Corylus is a good example. It was grafted on seedling understock, which sent up huge vertical stems while the pendulous scion continued horizontally along the ground. I would remove all of the "suckers" from the understock, and some of the prostrate stems while trying to train them up enough so that they weren't ground cover. That whole endeavor was a huge waste of time to grow a serviceable plant, but a great learning experience in just the topic you brought up here. Personally: having planted many dozens of VF elms over the past decade or more, I believe that this is just an overly vigorous selection that is difficult to "make up" as a single stemmed plant in an open-grown situation. The vigor leads to floppy stems, and you basically have a low-branched umbrella-shaped plant. You must stake and train a central leader, and prune early and often to maintain this against-the-grain habit with this plant. I think you would find greater success in densely planting all your elm rooted cuttings, and force straighter trunks by letting the individuals race for the light, like nature does in groups of competing trees (aka woodlands and forests). Here is a link that might be useful: THE RELATION OF VEGETATIVE PROPAGATION TO TOPOPHYSIS, CYCLOPHYSIS, AND PERIPHYSIS IN FOREST TREES

I will have mine pruned up to about 12 feet before I let them begin their typical arching vase shape. I may go even higher as I see them develop a little more. I have "Liberty Elms," which may be a little more erect growing and less spreading. I think 5 feet it is a little low for an elm to start its division into its large ascending limbs. Without seeing what you have it is hard to give good advice, but if the tree is young and vigorous, as it apparently is, you can do some really radical pruning that may seem extreme, but as the tree grows it will quickly overcome the loss and start growing in a better shape. Maybe you could select the best and strongest limb that is nearest the center of the others and cut off or radically shorten the others. It may look like a real "hack' job for a while, but in the long run it may make for a better tree. One of my trees has a tendency to fork with one side somewhat stronger but deflected in the opposite direction by the lesser side of the fork. I have been cutting off the lesser side, even though it seems extreme and leaves the trunk a bit crooked. But the tree is growing fast and so far it seems that the crook to the right, and then the one to the left will hardly be noticeable as the tree grows bigger and develops a balanced crown. At about 12 feet I see the tree beginning to divide into a beautiful set of ascending branches. For my tree that is probably the height it will have unless it develops in a way in the next couple of years that makes me thing differently. Many of the elms that once lined our town streets had divisions of their trunks 15 to 20 feet high. --Spruce

The property that used to be my Grandfather's place has some 100 year old plus elms, all americanas. We are in the Gulf of St Lawrence, so get LOTS of wind and freezing rain. They have stood up well. Some have died of the DED, but two are thought to be resistant. Since the current owner is injecting them with fungicide and has used Dutch trig, it's not known for sure if they are resistant, but their buddies started dying off fast and these two appeared to wall off small amounts in the crown. I have some of their seedlings, but suspect they are pollinated by their non resistant buddies that survive with treatments. A kind soul on this board has sent me seeds from his resistant trees, and two have made strong seedlings. It will be fun to plant them next to the Elmwood 18 seedlings and see what pops out. I still have my grandfather's woods, and there are elms there, so I am hoping to introgress resistance genes into the population in the woods. I haven't actually seen a Valley Forge, only its seedlings, so can't comment.