A ex-neighbor of mine has what I swear is a Japanese umbrella pine but it's not conical at all. It's about 4-5' tall and about 6' wide and very open -- not dense at all. I find it quite beautiful and would love to replicate it in my garden. It must be heavily pruned but when I questioned the owner about it she seemed totally clueless. She's the only person I've seen tending the yard so I'm pretty sure she doesn't have someone else pruning and training the specimen. I was told at one garden center that there are both tree and shrub versions of the Japanese Umbrella Pine but I can find no evidence of this in my online searching. I've moved away from the neighborhood but if I ever get back there I will take a photo and post it. I would appreciate any information that might help me identify this shrub on the chance that it is not an umbrella pine.

any one know more about the growth rates of these trees. I found mixed results on the net espesially on the Pinus densiflora 'Umbraculifera' I think some sites confust this with the Pinus densiflora 'Umbraculifera compacta' which I believe is a dwarf version of the tree. I really like the bristlecone pine mentioned but every thing I have read about this tree says it grows extremely slow. 1 to 2 inches per year which is too slow for me unless I could find me a 8 foot tree to start with. I didn't find much on the growth rate of the Pinus monophylla except slow. slow could mean 1 to 2 inches or is could mean 5 to 6 inches per year which I could live with. any more info in this aria would be greatly appreciated. as for my percipitation and temps we average more than an inch of percipitation per month with the exception of the summer months which I could add suppliment water. I have provided a link of weather conditions where I live. I am still leaning tword the Pinus densiflora 'Umbraculifera'or the Pinus densiflora if the Umbraculifera grows too slow. I am thinking I would like a tree that grows at a intermediat rate of 6 to 8 inches per year. and dose not get too tall. here is a link to info on my weather in the aria I live. it dose not mention humidity. I am not sure how important the humidity is for the Pinus densiflora. Jason Here is a link that might be useful: my weather

I have a similar story. I learned after planting how hard it is for these trees to root. It has been in the ground now for a year, and appears to be finally rooting, but 95% of the tree is dead. Temperatures in Virginia have been noticeably unpredictable in the past few years (concerning many) and the winter after planting was colder than normal. Should I cut down to the only alive branch or give up and start with a new tree?

" There is no reason to not fertilize plants correctly at planting time. And since a lot of woody material coming from retail garden centers has often been sitting there, waiting to sell for some months fertilization can be a critical need at the time of purchase by the end consumer." I must buy from "better" nurseries. Almost all new, container grow perennials/trees/shrubs I buy have copious amounts of tan or green "time release" (aka, wrong time!) fertilizer pellets throughout the soil mix. That I increasingly find plants without this 'feature' establish better and more permanently, strongly suggests to me that they probably already come loaded up with an optimal or (usually) beyond amount of NPK. I will fertilize early on in cases where obviously, it makes sense...a few micro-nurseries for example, that don't load their potting soil up with beads. Fresh rooted rhodo cuttings from Van Veen. (but even then, only VERY lightly!) but yes I'm saying as a blanket rule with most mass produced woody plants in MOST of the country (perhaps not Florida) it's either wasteful or frankly counter-productive to immediately fertilize them. I don't have the means or time to go commission some study of this, but I'm confident I'd be correct and will go on recommending that. Now, in an intense horticultural production environment, like wholesale field production of shade trees...it's different. They are planning to dig them all up in a few years. So studies tailored to that situation are clearly inadmissible. There is no reason to not fertilize plants correctly at planting time. Yes, the reason being quite simply, they usually don't need it. Usually doesn't mean always, obviously. Certain genus are an exception too, like Brugsmansias which are complete hogs when it comes to plant food. cf sample prior discussion: https://www.houzz.com/discussions/various-conifers-when-to-fertilize-dsvw-vd~1877846