The only tree I know of that has bark like that is the winged elm,
Ulmus alata. But I think you're a bit far north for it.

Here is a link that might be useful: winged elm

I think it is Euonymus alatus.

Here is a link that might be useful: E. alatus

Ditto Euonymus.

eahamel, Ulmus alata and euonymus alatus do look very much alike when they are leafless. The best way to determine which one you have when they are both hardy to the region in question is the fact Ulmus alata has alternate leaf arrangement while Euonymus alatus has opposite. You can see in the picture the branches are opposite. Hope this helps you in the future.

John

i would say winged Euonymus .. which is what they said.. mostly

but a leaf should easily allow us to decide between an elm and a burning bush .. so check back with a pic should spring actually ever come this year ...

the burning bush is highly invasive in many areas ..

ken

Ken, leaves are not needed to decide between the two. It could be another species altogether but it can NOT be ulmus alata because the leaf arrangement is opposite.

Positioning of the branches has nothing to do with leaf arrangement. Or IOW, an opposite leaf arrangement does not necessarily result in opposite branching (i.e. Acer, Hydrangea macrophylla). And I'm not at all sure how one can tell that the branching is opposite (??) from that photo. All you can tell is that the bark is winged.

The following is a photo of a known Euonymus alatus.......I sure as heck can't distinguish anything that looks like "opposite" branching :-)
{{gwi:193309}}

Can't see your picture, gardengal. However, in the OPs picture I think I see a couple silhouettes of fruit remains, which also look like Euonymus.

WW

Does this help?

Must be low-res monitors causing this confusion. ;-)

First two ulmus alata branches I found in the woods. Took all of 2 minutes... I can't see a single opposite branch arrangement anywhere! I've killed them by the hundreds and never noticed opposite branch arrangement.

{{gwi:193310}}

{{gwi:193311}}