I dug up the tag for the tree, attached. The part you cannot see reads Weeping Nootkatensis Chamaecyparis nootkatensis 'Select' I have also seen this variously referred to as Weeping Alaskan Cedar, Weeping Nootkatensis only, Weeping Nootkatensis with every suffix imaginable and then Weeping Nootkatensis 'Pendula' but the latter 3 are definitely not correct but I believe the first is the correct common name. If you google the latter you will see trees that look totally different from each other. I was specifically looking for the variant that was very full like in the picture below and the ones above. Unfortunately there is no standard to which growers adhere to so the proof is really only in the pudding. I've called growers and they say yes we have it then when I go to look at it it is not what I was looking for. I have no clue where you would find it in the USA as I live in Canada. How about you call the nursery I referenced above and ask them if they can ship you one or if they sell to any nurseries in the USA. Also you could call Terra too. This is, in my opinion, one of the most beautiful evergreens there is. I hope this helps you.

i was under the impression they were the same .. though i have no idea where that idea came from .. maybe a dream where i decided i didnt need another spring color pungens .... i would hesitate to rely on book pix or online pix in comparing such coloration ..... camera and film and the siting of the plant can vary so wildly that i would want to see them growing in the same garden in the same soil.. in the same light.. before i would 'believe' that there are significant differences .... and before i would be willing to invest in both .... maybe some dead braincell is thinking that van Hoey pictures baileys .. and somehow i came to believe that it is the same as spring ghost ... i will never know .. lol .. unless one of you read the same thing somewhere .... ken

I'm back at this again. So these do seem to be more Montana (zero pods on scapes) but then I have another one I happened upon (it was an unknown) that looks almost the same but deeper veins and loaded w/ pods. Could that be Ginba???

"Sorry, bellasinga, cannot agree with everything you'vesuggested. Your story has too many gaps, leaves too many questions unanswered, & involves too many accusations that have nothing to do with the children." It's 'bellesinga" and ask away. I'm happy to fill in any gaps in this reality - not "story" and I beg to differ, everything I've said here affects the children in some way. "Catching the clap" isn't something that affects the children, & it's not your place to get righteously incensed about it." True and I wasn't however, I'd say the behaviour of this BM should rightly inspire questions and it IS my place to understand the measure of the people with whom I have to deal and who have an effect on my household and the people I love - this is my family. Balanced women do not immediately devolve their responsibilities to their (very young) children upon the demise of a marriage in favour of sleeping around in the very house in which they are all living. One cannot sneer at this man's decency while seeking to absolve indecent behaviour by his ex - and it is indecent. I have no objection to free adults sleeping around but I DON'T think bringing strange men past the front window of the house where your children can clearly see you and ask why Mummy isn't coming in to see THEM is a decent thing to do. Just two days ago I was introduced to an old friend of hers who suddenly said how shocked she was when BM said she was leaving, saying "I'm so excited...I can't wait to go and start my new life - I can taste it!" When asked what was to happen to the children, she said "Oh they'll be just fine - XXX can look after them." She hadn't even told the father but thought it appropriate to 'crow' (not my description) about it to a friend. She then told her ex she had to run away as she had made a mess of her own life.....different story? Now she asserts in court papers that she DID sort custodial arrangements for the children before going..Trouble for her is, her ex's lawyer is the lawyer who drew up the papers which prove the very opposite. Sorry, it isn't hard to to call a spade a shovel and if it is a case of second guessing BM, we'll do it every time for good reason. Look, balanced women work out what is to be done with the care of their children FIRST. BM turned her back on her responsibilities to gratify herself and she had/has a very long history of doing so according to at least a dozen witnesses over the years. You don't know her but, regardless, we all make decisions about people based on their actions. Do you have a better methodology? "Why did husband not cancel credit cards after the first incident?" Because she did not have a job and he felt obliged to support her, The card was for her to have funds while things were sorted. He only found out when he got the bill. When she left, he supported her until she found work because he did not want the mother of his children on the streets. She returned the favour by never paying him back and as soon as she was in a good financial position, she reneged on the pact they made to each other to always cover the costs for the children 40/60 by going to the CSA and choosing the minimum visitation she could to avoid paying any more than the minimum support. Her son needed extensive dental work recently, we invited her to pay half - she refused citing her 'extreme poverty". He took her to the CSA for evaluation where they discovered her hoarding away $40 a week into an account. WE can't save $40 a week! It isn't a hard stretch to evaluate this BMs attitude, actions and behaviour and conclude she ain't a saint and should be regarded as a consistent liar. "Do you, the father's second wife, have legal custody so that the children's maternal grandmother can sue "us" rather than "him" for visitation?" Of course not and you know the answer as well as I - step parents have no legal standing in regards to these matters so why be unnecessarily combative in asking this? Regardless of legalities, I am entitled to use 'us' because it is my household being affected, my wage paying for this action and my efforts as a full-time stepmother dragged into it. I am named in the court papers and my opinion in a supporting Affidavit has been requested and filed. I will be called for questioning in court. Obviously some part of the system regards my contribution as worthy of note. "If their mother didn't care for the children when they had chicken pox, who did? somebody, right?" Yes, the father and his mother - their paternal grandmother. Your point? "She "took" 50/50 custody? Why did husband go along with this, with a woman who may have abandoned/endangered the children?" There is no 'may' about the abandonment. She bought a one-way ticket out of the country without warning OR consultation and left her children behind. Yes, she filed for 50/50 custody without warning on return and he did not contest this as he did not have the money but also felt it right that the children have good contact with the mother. He thought time away may have changed her. As for 'endangered', where did I say this? Is this a referral to her ignoring her responsibility as their mother to nurse them through the chicken pox? Listen, when you are living in the same house as your children and not working while your ex IS would it not behove you to look after them and most especially when they are ill and do not understand why Mum isn't spending ANY time with them? What entitlement did she have to expect the paternal grandmother to do this during the day and to leave all other duties to her ex when he came home from work?? Can I ask why you have so little to say about what a mother might reasonably be expected to do for her own children? "You seem to have an image of yourself as a member of a sort of Joan of Arc sorority here, *fighting for*, maybe saving, one of "these men"." Woah - please don't intimate things unsaid here. You don't know me so have the courtesy to keep such opinions and assertions controlled. I have not used these words and don't feel any such thing. What I do feel is that there are opposing sides to any story which deserve consideration and I have presented one such story to illustrate an opposing view which may support the initial post and suggest an alternative to your own view. "Firstly, many stepmothers who see themselves this way are actually being manipulated by their husbands, actively or passively; stepmom takes all the responsibility for the children & the father. She sees herself as heroically throwing herself into the breach; he sees her as the solution to a problem." I've no doubt in some cases that is true. "Secondly, her behavior may actuallly exacerbate the problem; by inserting herself between the parents, she may keep the kettle boiling rather than bringing down the heat." Thankfully I am not one of them. I've never allowed the children to call me "Mum" athough I've been asked. I've always demonstrated clear guidelines about my role in this family, I've been consistent in my support of the children's time with their mother and although the BM has asked ME three times to be the liason between herself and her ex and take on the role of facilitating handovers etc because (in her own words) "you're neutral and clear, we have no history together and so things can be kept calm", I have withdrawn in the face of her escalating manipulations and subversive actions which one could reasonably assume (given we have considerable verbal evidence) has arisen from her jealousy over my good relationship with the children. Equally there are many BMs who "keep the kettle boiling" by agitating when they realise their children are happy with another woman's ministrations - none of this has ANYTHING to do with the best interests of the children. Again, I have to point out the anomaly here. Women who put the best interests of their children above themselves do not otherwise agitate for discontent unless THEY are the ones with the problem OR can prove their agitation comes from a real concern for the children. Being jealous that the children are happy in their home, not allowing them to express that happiness to their mother, suggesting we would 'prevent them from coming' to her wedding (ridiculous, we sent them a congratulations card - never acknowledged!), claiming psychological abuse with the utter nonsense attitude that despite such 'abuse', she wants the children to remain with the 'abuser' is pure Parental Alienation. Now, in the US Court System this is punishable and for very good reason. Our own laws have yet to catch up, unfortunately for the children. Further, please don't espouse the idea that one can be a full-time stepmother and 'disengage' from any parenting - that is a nonsense. Commonly fathers work fulltime and it more often than not falls to the female partner to organise and caretake the children. Those children inevitably require some form of 'parenting' in the absence of the BM doing so herself. This isn't done for the self aggrandisement of the SM but for the growing needs of the children on a day-to-day basis. "He's a grown man; he can, he must, be responsible for his own welfare & for the welfare of the children." Yes he is, yes he can, yes he does, yes he knows it and he could not have demonstrated this any better than he has - by shouldering full custody in the face of her abandonment, by facilitating 50/50 custody when demanded, by shouldering the full-time responsibility in the second abandonment and by doing everything possible to facilitate access for the children to HER side of the family in the face of her not lifting a finger to do this herself. AGAIN, please don't assert the idea that full-time stepmothers are not to assist in the 'welfare' of the children to whom that vast majority care is given. We have the children 85% of the time. 100% of that time, I share parental responsibility regardless of biology. The same is true for any adoptive parent or parent of a child concieved by egg/sperm donor. Are you a fulltime stepparent? "'she wants the judge to order him never to offer her custody ever again.' Well, then. Problem solved!" Sorry, what is solved? We've never opposed the custodial arrangement between my husband and his ex. This case is not about the BM, it is about HER mother. The BM has taken the opportunity as a Respondent being interviewed by the court officer (who reports to the judge prior to the Interim Hearing) to accuse her ex of abuse which means the judge has ordered the children into court when we've tried to keep them out of such stress and give the son, who is 16, the consideration to choose for himself where he spends his time. Since this, we've discovered written proof and a confession from the son that BM AND her mother have enmeshed their adult feelings onto him with the result that he is now Parentally Alienated from his father. How do we know? How do you explain a boy who espouses attitudes and words he has never used before and doesn't otherwise exhibit any such animosity while with us which should support his wanting to be as far away from his father as possible YET wants to stay living with his father? It is utterly heartbreaking to realise this child is unable to express his love for his father because he feels such pressure from his BM to choose sides when we are NOT fighting HER and demonstrate some misguided 'loyalty' to her because he desperately wants to believe that doing so will ensure she really does love him and didn't run away from him.....Its seriously corrosive to his development. So we now have try to address the damage done so this young man can have a chance at growing up unencumbered by the adult feelings pushed onto him (which are not his own) and undamaged by the untrue assertions crippling his own formation of affection for his father. Once again - you cannot be a full-time stepmother and not 'parent' especially with young children, so the 'we' refers absolutely to me and my husband AND his mother who actually lives with us and has been witness to the entire story for 20 years. If you think PAS has nothing to do with you, think about this: These damaged children will become your co-workers or employees, your own children's partners or spouses, your neighbours etc etc. This affects our entire community. Stop PAS now and allow those who offer their ministrations support to ensure these children grow up to have their own feelings and opinions about their lives. This post was edited by bellesinga on Thu, Oct 2, 14 at 1:00