For the names of the maples you'd have to ask the nursery owner. But he may not know; so what you can also do is look at the growth habit of the tree and try to project out 20 years... and maples also lend themselves to pruning. If you want a high canopy, then all the branches you are looking at today will eventually be pruned off and a similar shape will be over your head. That is why to me the second maple/third picture looks more like what your property needs. But you could accommodate them both, or all three, if you manage them (once the other Bradford is gone, and honestly, it will likely be a lot cheaper to get rid of both at once - on the other hand, letting a new tree grow in for a few years first means you won't have to go through a moonscape phase). It actually looks like you might have a little new tree by the fence? Maples aren't always appreciative of being gardened under so if you want a flower bed I would be more inclined to remove your foundation hedge and corner pyramid evergreen, and make a nice garden there - those plantings weren't genius choices to start with and are getting past their best-before date. Removing that corner evergreen especially would open up your front door area nicely. Tree removal is always a good opportunity to rethink the whole property landscaping. If you do a plan view diagram and draw circles on it to represent the future canopies of your trees you may find it easier to think of options and placements. Consider sun direction and where you want shade. True you don't have a lot of room but there is scope for much better use of what you have. KarinL

Thanks for clearing up the confusion! I just read that Peaches and Almonds are close relatives which is why I was confused. Looks like in a couple months I'll be feasting on some Almonds which I like more that Peaches. That's good, I thought whatever it was that was growing was going to be a total loss this year. Thanks everyone!

Ah -- There is a shagbark hickory not far away! Thank you. You are fast!

Beng, that looks like a cycad to me, not any tree fern. Yes, looks prehistoric, even among the cycads, some are more "primitive" than others. But all these current modern "primitives" survivors of the prehistoric past are NOT the same as their ancestors (as I understand it to be true). Modern ginkgos are not the same as their ancient ancestors, but must have gotten something right!